Cohen v. Knutsen, et al.

Filing 10

ORDER to Vacate Hearing With Pending Remand Motion, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 7/1/2013. (This Court VACATES the 7/31/2013 hearing on Wells Fargo's 9 Motion for Summary Judgment. Wells Fargo may file and serve a renewed summary judgment motion after the remand motion ruling and if this action remains with this Court and is not remanded. This Court will take no further action on Wells Fargo's summary judgment motion until a remand order is issued and a renewed summary judgment motion is properly set before Judge O'Neill.) (Gaumnitz, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13
14

TAMMIE S. COHEN, as trustee
of the C. STARK 2004 TRUST,
Plaintiff,

15
vs.

16
17
18

CASE NO. CV F 13-0687 LJO SAB

ORDER TO VACATE HEARING WITH
PENDING REMAND MOTION
(Doc. 9 )

SONJA DIANE KNUTSEN,

19

Defendant.
______________________________/

20

AND RELATED CROSS ACTION.

21

______________________________/

22
23

On June 11, 2013, plaintiff Tammie Cohen filed her pending remand motion (doc. 7).

24

The remand motion is set for a July 31, 2013 hearing. On June 28, 2013, cross-defendant and

25

counter-claimant Wells Fargo & Company Cash Balance Plan ("Wells Fargo") filed its

26

summary judgment motion (doc. 9) and set a July 31, 2013 hearing. This Court does not rule

27

on dispositive motions until its jurisdiction and remand issues are settled.

28

///
1

1

Judges in the Eastern District of California carry the heaviest caseload in the nation,

2

and this Court is unable to devote inordinate time and resources to individual cases and

3

matters. As such, this Court will not devote time or resources to a summary judgment motion

4

which will be rendered moot if this action is remanded. Addressing the summary judgment

5

motion prior to determination of remand would jeopardize Judge O’Neill’s case management

6

and would necessitate devotion of inordinate time and resources to this case at the expense of

7

other actions and litigants.

8
9

The parties and this case will be best accommodated if the parties consent to the
conduct of all further proceedings by one of the Court’s U.S. Magistrate Judges.

The

10

Magistrate Judges' availability is far more realistic and accommodating to parties than that of

11

Judge O’Neill, who must prioritize criminal and older civil cases over more recently filed civil

12

cases. If the parties consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction, the reassigned magistrate judge

13

can devote more available resources to accommodate this action and the parties.

14

Moreover, civil trials set before Judge O'Neill trail until he becomes available and are

15

subject to suspension mid-trial to accommodate criminal matters. Civil trials are no longer

16

reset to a later date if Judge O'Neill is unavailable on the original date set for trial. If a trial

17

trails, it may proceed with little advance notice, and the parties and counsel may be expected to

18

proceed to trial with less than 24 hours notice. Also, this Court's Fresno Division randomly

19

and without advance notice reassigns civil actions to U.S. District Judges throughout the nation

20

to serve as visiting judges. In the absence of Magistrate Judge consent, this action is subject to

21

reassignment to a U.S. District Judge from outside the Eastern District of California. Case

22

management difficulties, including briefing schedules, trial setting and interruption, are

23

avoided if the parties consent to conduct of proceedings by a Magistrate Judge.

24

The parties are required to consider, and if necessary, to reconsider consent to one of

25

the Court’s Magistrate Judges. A Magistrate Judge consent form is available on this Court’s

26

website. The parties and counsel are encouraged to contact United States Senators Diane

27

Feinstein and Barbara Boxer to address this Court’s inability to accommodate the parties and

28
2

1

this case. For further information regarding handling of this case, the parties may contact staff

2

attorney Gary Green at [phone] or email him at [e-mail].

3

On the basis of good cause, this Court VACATES the July 31, 2013 hearing on Wells

4

Fargo's summary judgment. Wells Fargo may file and serve a renewed summary judgment

5

motion after the remand motion ruling and if this action remains with this Court and is not

6

remanded.

7

motion until a remand order is issued and a renewed summary judgment motion is properly set

8

before Judge O'Neill. No response or papers to oppose Wells Fargo's summary judgment

9

motion are to be filed until the summary judgment motion is properly renewed after the remand

10

This Court will take no further action on Wells Fargo's summary judgment

ruling. The clerk is directed to term doc. 9.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16
17

Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

July 1, 2013

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

66h44d

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3