Coleman, et al v. Schwarzenegger, et al

Filing 5675

THREE-JUDGE COURT ORDER signed by Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller and District Judge Jon S. Tigar on 9/12/2017 ORDERING intervenors who wish to remain on this case shall file a notice of intention to remain an intervenor on or before 10/12/2017. Any intervenor who does not timely file such notice will be terminated from this case with prejudice. (Donati, J)

1
2
3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS

4

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

AND THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT COMPOSED OF THREE JUDGES

7

PURSUANT TO SECTION 2284, TITLE 28 UNITED STATES CODE

8
9

RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,
Defendants.

13
14

MARCIANO PLATA, et al.,1

15

Plaintiff,

16
17

THREE-JUDGE COURT

v.

11
12

Case No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM DB P

Case No. 01-cv-01351-JST
THREE-JUDGE COURT
ORDER RE: STATUS OF INTERVENORS

v.
EDMUND G. BROWN JR., et al.,

18

Defendants.

19
20

Before trial in this matter, the court granted motions to intervene by various counties,

21

legislators, district attorneys, sheriffs, sheriff-coroners, county probation officers, and one city

22

chief of corrections. ECF Nos. 817/2376, 857/2427.2 The court subsequently granted stipulations

23

to dismiss several intervenors with prejudice. ECF No. 2121/3536, 2131/3550, 2302/3808.

24
25
1

26
27
28

The parties in the individual Plata v. Brown case have agreed that Marciano Plata should
be terminated as an individual plaintiff. Given the long history of this litigation and the general
familiarity with the Plata case name, the Plata court has decided not to change the case caption.
2
All filings in this Three-Judge Court are included in the individual docket sheets of both
Plata v. Brown, No. 01-cv-01351-JST (N.D. Cal.), and Coleman v. Brown, No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM
DB P (E.D. Cal.). This court includes the docket number of Plata first, then Coleman.

1

To ensure that the docket for this case is accurate, counsel for all remaining intervenors

2

shall consult with their clients to determine (a) whether the individuals or entities listed on the

3

court docket sheets wish to continue as intervenors in this case and (b) if so, whether any

4

substitutions need to be made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d). Intervenors who

5

wish to remain in this case shall file a notice of intention to remain an intervenor on or before

6

October 12, 2017. Any intervenor who does not timely file such notice will be terminated from

7

this case with prejudice. See Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Hercules Inc., 146 F.3d

8

1071, 1074 (9th Cir. 1998) (“[D]istrict courts have inherent power to control their dockets [unless]

9

its exercise would nullify the procedural choices reserved to parties under the federal rules.”).

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

Dated: September 12, 2017

14
15

_______________________________________
STEPHEN REINHARDT
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

16
17

Dated: September 12, 2017

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Dated: September 12, 2017
JON S. TIGAR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

25
26
27
28
2