McConnell v. <mark>Applied Digital Corporation</mark> — Entry #46: ORDER denying without prejudice 45 Motion for Oral Argument
Case: McConnell v. <mark>Applied Digital Corporation</mark> txnd · 3:23-cv-01805
filed August 12, 2023
What this document is
Docket entry #46 · filed September 08, 2025
ORDER denying without prejudice 45 Motion for Oral Argument. The Court instructs the Clerk of the Court to STAY and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE this proceeding pending resolution of the Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 36 ). (Ordered by Judge Ada Brown on 9/8/2025) (knb) (Entered: 09/08/2025)
Who is involved
- Applied Digital Corporation [tracked: Applied Digital]
- Craig Medley
- David Rench
- Irina Oren
- Mark Manion
- Philip McConnell
- Phillip Ellis
- Wesley Cummins
Why we have it
We follow this case because a company we track is a party: Applied Digital (listed as “Applied Digital Corporation”). We checked the full party list on September 28, 2026 and confirmed the match.
A free copy from the RECAP archive of federal court filings (mirrored at the Internet Archive), retrieved October 24, 2026. Federal court filings are public records.
Document text
1 page(s), 2,340 characters, converted from the PDF's text layer · plain text.
Full text
Case 3:23-cv-01805-E Document 46 Filed 09/08/25 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1963
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
PHILIP MCCONNELL et al., §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. § Civil Action No. 3:23-CV-01805-E
§
APPLIED DIGITAL CORPORATION et al., §
§
Defendants. §
§
§
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, which seeks dismissal of all of
Plaintiffs’ claims. (ECF No. 36). The Court determines it is in the interest of judicial efficiency to
stay and close this case, pending resolution of the Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 36). Therefore,
the Court STAYS and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSES this proceeding as follows:
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Court instructs the Clerk of the Court to STAY and ADMINISTRATIVELY
CLOSE this proceeding.
2. The Parties may make further filings in this case only with express leave of court.
3. The Court reserves reopening the case to set a hearing for oral argument, as necessary. The
Court reserves its right to set further pretrial deadlines after adjudication of the dispositive
motion, as necessary. The Court DENIES Defendants’ motion seeking oral argument
on their Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 45), without prejudice.
4. This is not a final judgment.
SO ORDERED this 8th day of September, 2025.
___________________________________
ADA BROWN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
ORDER Page 1 of 1