Graves v. King et al
Filing
8
ORDER RELATING CASES and REASSIGNING Action to Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 12/15/2014. New Case Number: 1:14-cv-1600-MJS (PC). (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MICHAEL GRAVES
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
v.
AUDREY KING, et al.,
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
New Case No. 1:14-cv-1600-MJS (PC)
ORDER RELATING CASES AND
REASSIGNING ACTION TO MAGISTRATE
JUDGE MICHAEL J. SENG
Defendants.
15
16
Case No. 1:14-cv-1600-DLB (PC)
On October 6, 2014, Plaintiff filed this Civil Rights Complaint pursuant to 42
U.S.C. section 1983 challenging Defendants’ assessment, classification and detention of
Plaintiff under California’s Sexually Violent Predator Act and failure to provide him
outpatient treatment in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
(ECF No. 1.)
A number of virtually identical actions have been filed in or transferred to this
Court. The Court’s review of these cases reveals that the instant action is related under
Local Rule 123 to the action entitled Klein v. King, 1:14-cv-01440-MJS. Both actions are
based on the same underlying facts and involve overlapping questions of law and fact.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.
The Office of the Clerk shall relate this case with case 1:14-cv-01440-MJS;
2.
This case shall be assigned to the docket of Magistrate Judge Michael J.
28
1
Seng;
1
2
3.
The new case number shall be:
1:14-cv-1600-MJS
3
4
and all future pleadings and/or correspondence must be so numbered.
5
Use of an incorrect case number or incorrect judge’s initials may result in
6
delay in processing documents and distribution of copies to the judge
7
assigned.
8
9
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
December 15, 2014
/s/
11
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?