Mail Boxes Etc., Inc. v. Paton et al

Filing 6

RELATED CASE ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/8/06 re 5 ORDERING that case 05cv258 LKK GGH is related with member of case 06cv259 GEB KJM and 06cv260 DFL GGH. Clerk is directed to make appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to compensate for this reassignment(Duong, D)

Mail Boxes Etc., Inc. v. Paton et al

Doc. 6

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 1 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Defendant. 14 MAIL BOXES, ETC., INC., 15 Plaintiff, 16 v. 17 18 19 20 MAIL BOXES, ETC., INC., 21 Plaintiff, 22 v. 23 24 25 26 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MAIL BOXES, ETC., INC., Plaintiff, v. MARILYN PATON, an individual; and WALTER PATON, an individual, / CIV. NO. S-06-258 LKK/GGH

CIV. NO. S-06-259 GEB/KJM

DAVID DERUS, an individual; and LA JEAN KUETHE-DERUS, an individual, Defendants. /

CIV. NO. S-06-260 DFL/GGH RELATED CASE ORDER

CRAIG HANSEN, an individual; and MARCIA HANSEN, an individual, Defendants. /

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 2 of 9

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

Examination of the above-entitled actions reveals that the three (3) actions are related within the meaning of Local Rule 83-123(a) (E.D. Cal. 1997). The actions involve some of the same

parties, and are based on the same or similar claims, the same property, transaction or event, similar questions of fact and the same question of law. Accordingly, the assignment of the matters to the same judge and magistrate judge is likely to effect a substantial savings of judicial effort and is also likely to be convenient for the parties. The parties should be aware that relating the cases under Local Rule 83-123 merely has the result that the three (3) actions are assigned to the same judge and magistrate judge; no consolidation of the actions is effected. Under the regular

practice of this court, related cases are generally assigned to the judge and magistrate judge to whom the first filed action was assigned. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the actions denominated CIV. NO. S-06-259 GEB/KJM and CIV. NO. S-06-260 DFL/GGH be, and the same hereby are, reassigned to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton and Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows for all further proceedings, and any dates currently set in this reassigned case only are hereby VACATED. The parties are referred to the attached Order Setting Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference. Henceforth, the caption on

documents filed in the reassigned case shall be shown as CIV. NO. S-06-259 LKK/GGH and CIV. NO. S-06-260 LKK/GGH, respectively. 2

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 3 of 9

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court make appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to

compensate for this reassignment. DATED: February 8, 2006. /s/Lawrence K. Karlton LAWRENCE K. KARLTON SENIOR JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 4 of 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

STATSET.LKK (rev. 12/00)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

_________________________________, NO. CIV. S-____________ LKK Plaintiff(s), v. _________________________________, ORDER SETTING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE Defendant(s).

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 / This action has been assigned to the Honorable LAWRENCE K. KARLTON. Pursuant to the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 16, as amended December 1, 1993, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is SET for in

all three above-captioned cases on April 17, 2006 at 2:30 p.m., before Judge Karlton in Chambers. //// //// //// 4

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 5 of 9

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

2.

In order to enable the court to comply with the 120-day

time limit specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b), plaintiff SHALL COMPLETE SERVICE OF PROCESS ON ALL PARTIES WITHIN FORTY-FIVE (45) DAYS OF THE DATE OF FILING THE COMPLAINT HEREIN. 3. Concurrently with the service of process, or as soon

thereafter as possible, plaintiff shall serve upon each of the parties named in the complaint, and upon all parties subsequently joined, a copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk a certificate reflecting such service. Any party who impleads a

third-party defendant shall serve upon that party a copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk a certificate reflecting such service. 4. In the event that this action was reassigned to Judge

Karlton from another judge, plaintiff shall serve upon all parties to this action a copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk a certificate reflecting such service. 5. Any non-governmental corporate party to an action in this

court shall file a statement identifying all its parent corporations and listing any publicly held company that owns 10% or more of the party's stock. Defendant shall file the statement

with its initial pleading filed in the court and plaintiff shall file the statement not later than ten (10) days after filing the complaint. The parties shall supplement the statement within a

reasonable time of any change in the information. 6. In the event this action was originally filed in a state

court and thereafter removed to this court, the removing party or 5

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 6 of 9

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

parties shall, immediately following such removal, serve upon each of the other parties and upon all parties subsequently joined, a copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk a certificate reflecting such service. 7. Conference All parties to the action shall appear at the Status through counsel (or in person, if acting without

counsel). UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED OTHERWISE, COUNSEL LOCATED OUTSIDE THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO MAY APPEAR BY TELEPHONE, PROVIDED THAT: (a) THE ACTION DOES NOT INVOLVE A LITIGANT APPEARING IN IN SUCH CASES, ALL COUNSEL AND LITIGANTS MUST

PROPRIA PERSONA.

PERSONALLY APPEAR; and (b) COUNSEL STATE IN THEIR TIMELY-FILED STATUS REPORTS

AS REQUIRED BY THIS ORDER THEIR DESIRE TO SO APPEAR, AND THEREIN PROVIDE THE TELEPHONE NUMBER THEY WILL BE CALLING FROM; and (c) PLACE THE CALL TO CHAMBERS THEMSELVES BY CALLING

[phone], AT EXACTLY THE TIME THE CONFERENCE IS SCHEDULED TO BEGIN. IF MORE THAN ONE PARTY DESIRES TO APPEAR BY TELEPHONE,

COUNSEL MUST MAKE ARRANGEMENTS AMONG THEMSELVES TO SET UP THE CONFERENCE CALL AT THE SCHEDULED TIME WITH ALL PARTICIPANTS ON THE LINE BEFORE CALLING CHAMBERS. A FAILURE TO PLACE THE TELEPHONE

CALL AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME WILL BE TREATED AS A FAILURE TO APPEAR AND MAY SUBJECT COUNSEL TO SANCTIONS. 8. The parties shall file with the court and serve upon all

other parties, not later than 4:30 p.m., ten (10) days preceding the conference, a Status Report. 6 ANY PARTY FAILING TO FILE A

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 7 of 9

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

TIMELY STATUS REPORT PURSUANT TO THIS ORDER MAY BE SUBJECTED TO MONETARY SANCTIONS AND/OR THE DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT OR STRIKING OF THE ANSWER. The Status Report shall briefly set out

the views of the party making the report on the following matters: (a) (b) Name(s) of the parties counsel represents; A brief summary of the facts alleged in each

complaint and a characterization of the legal theories under which recovery is sought or liability denied. The characterization of

the legal theories does not require legal argument, but only a description of the legal theory (or theories); (c) (d) (e) (f) venue; (g) (h) Anticipated motions and the scheduling thereof; Anticipated discovery and the scheduling thereof. Progress in the service of process; Possible joinder of additional parties; Any expected or desired amendment of pleadings; Specifying the statutory basis for jurisdiction and

In this regard, the parties shall discuss whether deferral of discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d) is appropriate, any order affecting discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and 29-37 is desired, and whether a discovery conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) should be held; (i) Future proceedings, including setting appropriate

cut-off dates for discovery, law and motion, and the scheduling of the pretrial conference and trial; //// 7

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 8 of 9

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

(j)

Appropriateness

of

special

procedures

such

as

agreement to try the matter before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), or reference to a special master, or to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, or application of the Manual for Complex Litigation, binding arbitration in Superior Court; (k) trial by jury; (l) (m) Estimate of trial time; Modification of standard pretrial procedures Whether any of the parties has timely demanded a

specified by the local rules due to the relative simplicity or complexity of the action; (n) Whether the case is related to any other case,

including any matters in bankruptcy; (o) Whether counsel will stipulate to the trial judge

acting as settlement judge and waive any disqualification by virtue thereof, or whether the parties prefer to have a settlement conference before another judge; (p) The report of the parties concerning use of the

Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program pursuant to Local Rule 16-271; (q) Any other matters which may be conducive to the

just, efficient, and economical determination of the action. Following the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference, the court will issue a written order regarding the future course of this litigation. //// 8

Case 2:06-cv-00258-LKK-GGH

Document 6

Filed 02/08/2006

Page 9 of 9

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

9.

Requests for continuance of Status Conferences are not

favored and will not be granted in the absence of a true emergency and, in any event, will not be entertained unless made in writing at least THREE (3) DAYS prior to the scheduled conference. 10. At the time of filing a motion or an opposition thereto,

counsel are requested to deliver to the court a copy on a 3½" floppy disk compatible with WordPerfect 8.0 or e-mail a copy to the Judge's Assistant, Tim Hinkle, at [e-mail]. 11. Counsel are hereby reminded of their continuing duty to

immediately notify the Courtroom Deputy at [phone] and the Judge's Chambers in writing, of any settlement or other disposition (Local Rule 16-160). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: February 8, 2006

/s/ LAWRENCE K. KARLTON SENIOR JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9