Hassel et al v. Sisto et al

Filing 8

RELATED CASE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 6/24/2010 ORDERING that all further docs filed in CIV NO. S-10-0513 GGH shall reference the case number: CIV S-10-0513 KJM; the clerk to make the appropriate adjustment in the assignment to compensate for this reassignment.(Yin, K)

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 vs. D.K. SISTO, et al., Defendants. / 1 RELATED CASE ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RALPH BLASINGAME, et al., Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-10-514 KJM P vs. D.K. SISTO, et al., Defendant. / J. OGO, et al., Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-10-513 GGH P vs. D.K. SISTO, et al., Defendants. / IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID HASSEL, et al, Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-10-191 KJM P

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 hass0191+.relate

Examination of the above-entitled actions reveals that these actions are related within the meaning of Local Rule 123(a). The actions involve the same defendants and are based on the same or similar claims, the same transactions or events, similar questions of fact and the same question of law. Accordingly, the assignment of the matters to the same 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 123 merely has the result that the actions are assigned to the same magistrate judge; no consolidation of the actions is effected. Under the regular practice of this court, related cases are generally assigned to the magistrate judge to whom the first filed action was assigned. Although relation does not equal consolidation, the identical nature of these complaints suggests that consolidation would be appropriate. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. All further documents filed in CIV NO. S-10-513 GGH shall reference the following case number: CIV S-10-513 KJM. 2. For all further proceedings, and any dates currently set in this reassigned case only are hereby VACATED. 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed make appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to compensate for this reassignment. 4. Counsel for plaintiffs in CIV. NO. S-10-153 and CIV NO. S-10-154 show cause within twenty-one days of the date of this order why these three actions should not be consolidated. DATED: June 24, 2010.

2