George N. Allen v. Mayberg et al

Filing 55

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES: Lead Case is 1:06-cv-1801-BLW-LMB, Member Case 1:08-cv-01339-JLS-BLM; Member Case Closed; All future filings to be made in Lead Case; Plaintiff Jackie Robinson and Defendants: Miriam Joya, Maria Zavala, Duvall and Ofelia Corona added, signed by District Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 8/3/2010. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
(PC) George N. Allen v. Mayberg et al Doc. 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION JACKIE ROBINSON, Plaintiff, vs. MIRIAM JOYA, et al., Defendants. Civil No. 1: 08-01339-JLS-BLM ORDER LIFTING STAY, REASSIGNING AND CONSOLIDATING CIVIL CASE 1:08-CV-01339-JLS-BLM WITH LEAD RELATED CIVIL CONSOLIDATED CASE No. 1:06-CV-01801-BLW-LMB Currently pending in this civil action, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by Jackie Robinson ("Plaintiff"), a Sexually Violent Predator ("SVP") currently detained at Coalinga State Hospital ("CSH") in Coalinga, California, is Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 35], as well as his Motion for Preliminary Injunction [Doc. No. 36]. In an Order dated April 29, 2010, this Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File his Third Amended Complaint and stayed further proceedings pending a consolidation determination by Chief Judge B. Lynn Winmill in another consolidated civil matter, Allen v. Mayberg, et al., E.D. California Civil Case No. 1:06-CV-01801-BLW-LMB. See April 29, 2010 Order [Doc. No. 44] at 8-10. /// -1- K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JLS\08cv1339-EDCA-Lift-Stay&Consolidate.wpd E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 08cv01339-JLS (BLM) Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 In granting the stay, this Court noted that counsel for Defendants had filed a Notice of Related Case in Allen requesting that this case, Robinson, E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:08-01339JLS-BLM, be consolidated with the lead consolidated Allen case pursuant to E.D. Cal. CivLR 123(c), because at the time the Notice was filed, all that remained of this case were Plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief related to the California Department of Mental Health ("DMH") and CSH's moratorium on computer purchases and possession by SVPs serving their terms of civil commitment at CSH. See Allen, 1:06-CV-01801-BLW-LMB, Defs.' Notice of Related Cases [Doc. No. 43] at 5-6. The consolidated Allen case, as well as the six other cases identified by Defendants as related and appropriate for consolidation with Allen, all involve claims made by SVPs related to CSH's computer moratorium and the adoption of emergency regulations declaring SVPs' personal computers to be contraband. Id. at 4-7. Similarly, the only claims remaining in this case (Robinson) are Plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief as alleged in his Third Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 35] against DMH and CSH related to the computer moratorium, as well as his Motion for Preliminary Injunction challenging that moratorium [Doc. No. 36]. All other allegations against any other party named in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint have been dismissed without further leave to amend. See April 29, 2010 Order [Doc. No. 44] at 3-8. On July 22, 2010, United States Magistrate Judge Larry M. Boyle issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") and Order in the consolidated Allen case directing the Clerk of Court to send a copy of his Order to this Court, as well as the presiding judges in the six other cases identified by Defendants as related cases to "determine whether to reassign [each] particular case for consolidation based on the claims made in [each] particular case." See Allen v. Mayberg, et al., E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:06-CV-01801-BLW-LMB, July 23, 2010 R&R and Order [Doc. No. 54] at 6. Judge Boyle noted that unless the case "has been processed to the point that it is close enough to resolution so that consolidation would effect an unnecessary delay .... it should be reassigned to this Court and consolidated with this action." Id. Judge Boyle also "respectfully request[ed] ... that [the] reassignment occur within thirty (30) days of his Order. Id. at 9. -2E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 08cv01339-JLS (BLM) K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JLS\08cv1339-EDCA-Lift-Stay&Consolidate.wpd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Accordingly, this Court now finds that Robinson v. Joya, et al., E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:08-CV-01339-JLS-BLM is sufficiently related to Allen v. Mayberg, et al., E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:06-CV-01801-BLW-LMB to justify its reassignment to that court and consolidation with that case. This Court further finds that both cases involve similar issues of law and fact and that neither reassignment nor consolidation will effect any unnecessary cost or delay. See FED.R.CIV.P. 42(a); Pierce v. County of Orange, 526 F.3d 1190, 1203 (9th Cir. 2008) (noting district court's "broad discretion" to consolidate civil actions under Rule 42, especially those pending in the same district) (internal citation omitted). Conclusion and Order For all the reasons set forth above, this Court hereby lifts the stay entered in this matter on April 29, 2010, and reassigns and consolidates this action, Robinson v. Joya, E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:08-CV-01339-JLS-BLM with Allen v. Mayberg, et al., E.D. Cal. Lead Consolidated Civil Case No. 1:06-CV-01801-BLW-LMB pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 42(a). The Clerk of Court is directed to file a copy of this Order in both this civil docket as well as in the docket of Allen v. Mayberg, et al., Civil Case No. 1:08-CV-01801-BLW-LMB in order to notify both courts and all parties of the reassignment and consolidation. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: August 3, 2010 Honorable Janis L. Sammartino United States District Judge K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JLS\08cv1339-EDCA-Lift-Stay&Consolidate.wpd -3- E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 08cv01339-JLS (BLM)

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.


Why Is My Information Online?