Isaac E. Larian et al v. United States of America

Filing 16

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: CONSOLIDATION OF ACTIONS by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 7/27/2017. (vdr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 17-2490 FMO (AGRx)

Title

Isaac E. and Angela Larian v. United States of America

Present: The Honorable

Date

July 19, 2017

Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge

Vanessa Figueroa

None

None

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorney Present for Plaintiff(s):

Attorney Present for Defendant(s):

None Present

None Present

Proceedings:

(In Chambers) Order to Show Cause re Consolidation of Actions

On March 30, 2017, plaintiffs Isaac E. and Angela Larian filed their Complaint in Larian v.
United States of America, Case No. CV 17-2490 (C.D. Cal.). (Dkt. 1, “Larian Complaint”). The
Larian Complaint alleges that plaintiffs overpaid taxes in 2004 and 2005. (See id. at p. 1). The
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) denied or has not paid plaintiffs’ refund claim for legal expense
deductions they sought in connection with their S corporation, MGA Entertainment, Inc. (See id.
at ¶¶ 5, 7, 19, 26-27, 29, 35).
Also on March 30, 2017, plaintiffs Jahangir H. and Shirin L. Makabi filed their Complaint in
Makabi v. United States of America, Case No. 17-2494 (C.D. Cal.). (Dkt. 1, “Makabi Complaint”).
The Makabi Complaint alleges that plaintiffs overpaid taxes in 2004 and 2005. (See id. at p. 1).
The IRS denied or has not paid plaintiffs’ refund claim for legal expense deductions they sought
in connection with their S corporation, MGA Entertainment, Inc. (See id. at ¶¶ 5, 7, 19, 25-26, 27,
33).
“If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may . . .
consolidate the actions[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(2). The court “weighs the saving of time and
effort consolidation would produce against any inconvenience, delay, or expense that it would
cause.” Huene v. United States, 743 F.2d 703, 704 (9th Cir. 1984). “A district court generally has
‘broad’ discretion to consolidate actions[.]” Pierce v. Cnty. of Orange, 526 F.3d 1190, 1203 (9th
Cir.), cert. denied, 555 U.S. 1031 (2008). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that by no later than July
27, 2017, the parties shall file either a stipulation or response, not to exceed five pages, to show
cause why the Larian and Makabi actions should not be consolidated.

00
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

:

00

vdr

Page 1 of 1