Judge Rita Lin, of the Northern District of California, denied Experian’s motion to stay and request for protective order based on the pending appeal in Variety Media, LLC v. The Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, Case No. B350578 (Cal. Ct. App., filed Nov. 21, 2025).
Background. Mitchell’s action against Experian asserts intrusion upon seclusion, violations of CIPA sections 631(a) and 638.51, and violation of ECPA claims arising from alleged internet tracking and interception of electronic communications. Defendant argued that Variety Media could affect the Section 638.51 theory and provide guidance on internet technology. Mitchell’s case was already in discovery, with class-certification expert disclosures scheduled for November 2026.
The Court’s Analysis. The court applied its discretionary standard for stays and weighed the risk of delay against any hardship to Experian. It emphasized that Variety Media would not resolve the intrusion-upon-seclusion, CIPA Section 631(a), or ECPA claims, which defendant concedes were independent of the appellate issue. Discovery on Section 638.51 was also likely to overlap substantially with discovery on the other claims, and defendant identified no concrete prejudice from continuing. Because the appellate ruling was speculative and the existing schedule allowed time for it to issue before class-certification proceedings, the court denied the stay and protective-order request.
Mitchell v. Experian Data Corp., No. 25-CV-02873-RFL, 2026 WL 1045673, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2026).
