Bandy, et al. v. Move, Inc., et al.
| JAMES BANDY, BRYAN CASTRO, MICHAEL ECHTERNKAMP, KAMESHA SYLVESTER HAMILTON, MARIA HARDY, NIDIA SANCHEZ, CLIFF WOODHALL, DANIELLE HENDERSON, NOAH HENDERSON, BRIAN LISCIO, JOHN SIDDONS, BREE SWEET, each individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated and JUAN CARLOS |
| MOVE, INC., MOVE SALES, INC., NEWS CORPORATION, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, OPCITY ACQUISITION, LLC, OPCITY, INC., DOES, 1 through 20, inclusive and REALTORS INFORMATION NETWORK, INC. |
| 25-2095 |
| April 1, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| BANDY, ET AL. V. MOVE, INC., ET AL.Los Angeles, Central CaliforniaCivilGraber, Susan P., Koh, Lucy H., Thomas, Holly A. |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 4, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 TEXT ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 18) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due November 17, 2025. The answering brief is due December 17, 2025. The optional reply brief is due 21 days after the answering brief is served. [Entered: 09/04/2025 08:53 AM] |
| Filing 18 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. [Entered: 09/03/2025 09:26 AM] |
Filing 17
ORDER FILED. On July 21, 2025, this court: (1) denied appellants motion for a limited remand without prejudice to renewing the motion if the district court issues an indicative ruling that it would grant appellants motion for reconsideration or that the motion raises a substantial issue; and (2) ordered appellants to voluntarily dismiss this appeal or file a statement explaining why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The court has received the responses to the July 21, 2025 order. This appeal will proceed. In addition to all other issues the parties wish to raise in their briefs, the parties must address whether this court has jurisdiction over this appeal in light of the district courts characterization of its March 3, 2025 order as functionally indistinguishable from a stay of the claims subject to arbitration. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; Dees v. Billy, 394 F.3d 1290, 1294 (9th Cir. 2005) ([A] district court order staying judicial proceedings and compelling arbitration is not appealable even if accompanied by an administrative closing.). The opening brief is due September 17, 2025. The answering brief is due October 17, 2025. The optional reply brief is due 21 days after the answering brief is served. [Entered: 08/18/2025 03:09 PM]
|
| Filing 16 REPLY to Response to Court Order (DE 15) filed by Appellee Move, Inc., Appellee Move Sales, Inc., Appellee News Corporation, Appellee National Association of Realtors, Appellee Opcity Acquisition, LLC, Appellee Opcity, Inc.. [Entered: 08/13/2025 03:31 PM] |
| Filing 15 RESPONSE to Order - General OSC (DE 14) filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. [Entered: 08/11/2025 02:25 PM] |
|
Filing 14
ORDER FILED. This court may lack jurisdiction over the district courts March 3, 2025 order dismissing some defendants and compelling arbitration as to another defendant. The district court characterized the order as functionally indistinguishable from a stay of the claims subject to arbitration. [A] district court order staying judicial proceedings and compelling arbitration is not appealable even if accompanied by an administrative closing. Dees v. Billy, 394 F.3d 1290, 1294 (9th Cir. 2005). The March 3, 2025 order therefore may not have dispose[d] of all claims as to all parties. See Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738, 747 (9th Cir. 2008); 28 U.S.C. 1291. Within 21 days, appellants must either file a motion to voluntarily dismiss this appeal or file a statement explaining why it should not be dismissed. If appellants do not do so, the court will dismiss the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. If appellants file a statement, appellees may file a response within 10 days. The motion (Docket Entry No. 11) for a limited remand is denied without prejudice to renewing the motion if the district court issues an indicative ruling that it would grant the motion or that the motion raises a substantial issue. See Fed. R. App. P. 12.1(b). Briefing is stayed. [Entered: 07/21/2025 04:12 PM]
|
| Filing 13 REPLY to Response to Motion for Limited Remand (DE 12) filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. [Entered: 07/21/2025 10:40 AM] |
| Filing 12 RESPONSE to Motion for Limited Remand (DE 11) filed by Appellee Move, Inc., Appellee Move Sales, Inc., Appellee News Corporation, Appellee National Association of Realtors, Appellee Opcity Acquisition, LLC, Appellee Opcity, Inc.. --[COURT UPDATE: Updated order of PDFs.] [Entered: 07/15/2025 04:48 PM] [Edited: 07/16/2025 10:08 AM] |
| Filing 11 MOTION for Limited Remand filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. [Entered: 07/05/2025 04:53 PM] |
|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. (TEXT ONLY) The motion (Docket Entry No. 9) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is September 2, 2025. The answering brief is due October 2, 2025. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 07/03/2025 02:09 PM]
|
| Filing 9 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. [Entered: 07/01/2025 10:05 AM] |
| Filing 8 RELEASED FROM MEDIATION (text only). This case is released from the Mediation Program. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant settlement discussions. [Entered: 04/24/2025 01:54 PM] |
|
Filing 7
ORDER FILED. (TEXT ONLY) The motion (Docket Entry No. 5) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due July 14, 2025. The answering brief is due August 13, 2025. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 04/17/2025 08:50 AM]
|
| Filing 6 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN Assessment Conference, 4/24/2025, 11:00 a.m. PACIFIC Time. See order for instructions and details. [Entered: 04/16/2025 01:15 PM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. [Entered: 04/14/2025 12:32 PM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION QUESTIONNAIRE filed by Appellant James Bandy, Appellant Bryan Castro, Appellant Michael Echternkamp, Appellant Kamesha Sylvester Hamilton, Appellant Maria Hardy, Appellant Nidia Sanchez, Appellant Cliff Woodhall, Appellant Danielle Henderson, Appellant Noah Henderson, Appellant Brian Liscio, Appellant John Siddons, Appellant Bree Sweet, Appellant Juan Carlos. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please email #[email protected] and include the case name and number in the subject line. Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts. [Entered: 04/10/2025 09:24 AM] |
| Filing 3 MEDIATION ORDER (text only): Mediation Questionnaire due (Appellant) 4/11/2025. The court of appeals' records do not indicate that appellant has filed a mediation questionnaire in accordance with Cir. R. 3-4. Appellant shall file a Mediation Questionnaire (#form07.pdf (uscourts.gov)) or dismiss the appeal voluntarily. Information about the mediation program may be found on the court's website: #www.ca9.uscourts.gov/mediation. [Entered: 04/08/2025 12:06 PM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Mediation Questionnaire due (Appellant) 4/7/2025, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 5/12/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 6/10/2025. For appeal no. 25-2095, 2:24-cv-10492-SB-JPR. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. Failure of the petitioner(s)/appellant(s) to comply with this briefing schedule will result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 04/01/2025 01:33 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 2:24-cv-10492-SB-JPR has been received in the Clerk's office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 25-2095 has been assigned to this case. All communications with the court must indicate this Court of Appeals docket number. Please carefully review the docket to ensure the name(s) and contact information are correct. It is your responsibility to alert the court if your contact information changes. Resources Available For more information about case processing and to assist you in preparing your brief, please review the Case Opening Information (for #attorneys and #pro se litigants) and review the #Appellate Practice Guide. Attorneys should consider contacting the court's #Appellate Mentoring Program for help with the brief and argument. [Entered: 04/01/2025 01:26 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
