Gold Value International Textile Inc v. Stein Mart Inc et al

Filing 11

ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) TO SHOW CAUSE RE IMPROPER JOINDER by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. The Court orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing no later than July 30, 2014 why the Court should not dismiss without prejudice all but the first named Defendant on the grounds of improper joinder of parties. Failure to respond by the above date will result in the Court dismissing this action. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. (cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Date

July 10, 2014

Case No.

CV 14-4896 PSG (AJWx)

Title

Gold Value International Textile, Inc. v. Stein Mart, Inc., et al.

Present:

The Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez, United States District Judge
Wendy Hernandez
Deputy Clerk

Not Reported
Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings: (In Chambers): Order to Show Cause Re: Improper Joinder
Plaintiff Gold Value International Textile, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against
Defendants Stein Mart, Inc.; T.H.E. Design Group, Inc.; and Does 1-10 (collectively,
“Defendants”) for alleged copyright infringement. See Dkt. # 1. Defendants are alleged to have
infringed upon one of Plaintiff’s designs. Compl. ¶¶ 11-15. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants
created, sold, manufactured, imported and/or distributed fabric and/or garments composed of
fabric bearing an unauthorized reproduction of Plaintiff’s design. Compl. ¶ 15. Plaintiff does
not allege that Defendants’ conduct was part of the same transaction or occurrence, that
Defendants acted in concert, or that Defendants’ conduct was connected.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) provides the circumstances under which
Defendants may be joined, stating:
“Persons . . . may be joined in one action as defendants if:
(A) any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally,
or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same
transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences;
and
(B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will
arise in the action.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). Though Plaintiff joins several Defendants in this action, the Complaint
does not contain a statement asserting that Defendants are properly joined pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a). Further, it does not appear that Plaintiff has asserted a right
CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Date

July 10, 2014

Case No.

CV 14-4896 PSG (AJWx)

Title

Gold Value International Textile, Inc. v. Stein Mart, Inc., et al.

against Defendants “arising out of the same transaction and occurrence.” See Coleman v.
Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1296 (9th Cir. 2000) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)).
If the Court determines that parties are misjoined, the Court may, at any time, add or drop
a party, or sever any claim against a party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. Where defendants have been
misjoined, the Court may generally dismiss without prejudice all but the first named defendant.
See Coughlin v. Rogers, 130 F.3d 1348, 1351 (9th Cir. 1997) (“If the test for permissive joinder
is not satisfied . . . the court can generally dismiss all but the first named plaintiff without
prejudice.”); Townsend v. Nat’l Arbitration Forum, No. CV 09-9325-VBK (RNBx), 2012 WL
12736, at *11 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2012) (citing to Coughlin for the proposition that the court may
dismiss without prejudice all but the first named defendant if the test for permissive joinder of
defendants is not satisfied). Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing no
later than July 30, 2014 why the Court should not dismiss without prejudice all but the first
named Defendant on the grounds of improper joinder of parties. Failure to respond by the above
date will result in the Court dismissing this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2