Granite Outlet Inc. v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Company, Inc.

Filing 14

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 6/18/14: Notice of Related Cases shall be filed no later than 11:59 p.m. on Monday, June 23, 2014. Defendant's pending dismissal motion 6 , is deemed withdrawn. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

GRANITE OUTLET, INC.,

8
9
10
11

2:14-cv-00575-GEB-KJN

Plaintiff,
v.
HARTFORD CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY, Inc., and Does 1 to
10, Inclusive,

12

ORDER REQUIRING NOTICE OF
RELATED CASES TO BE FILED;
DEEMING DEFENDANT’S DISMISSAL
MOTION WITHDRAWN

Defendant.

13
14
This Order issues after consideration of the following

15
16

statement

17

dismiss:

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

in

Plaintiff’s

opposition

to

Defendant’s

motion

to

We . . . bring to the court's attention the
following related case: plaintiff had a
pending
federal
civil
rights
against
Christine Baker, Director of the Department
of Industrial Relations, . . . Granite Outlet
v. Christine Baker, USDC EDCA Case No. 14-cv00124-TLN-EFB, alleging that the appeal bond
requirements of Labor Code section 98.2(b)
and other practices of the Labor Commissioner
are unconstitutional. We will file a Notice
of Related case shortly.
(Pls.’ Opp’n to Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss, 20: 10-16, ECF No. 13.)
However, Local Rule 123(b) prescribes: “Counsel who has reason to
believe that an action on file . . . may be related to another
action on file . . . shall promptly file in each action and serve

28
1

1

on all parties in each action a Notice of Related Cases.” E.D.

2

Cal. L.R. 123(b) (emphasis added). It should be evident that a

3

purpose of this rule is to provide the judge making the related

4

case decision time to make that decision before a judge assigned

5

the later-filed case expends judicial resources deciding a matter

6

in the later-filed case. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 123(c) (“If the Judge

7

to whom the action with the lower or lowest number has been

8

assigned determines that assignment of the actions to a single

9

Judge is likely to effect a savings of judicial effort or other

10

economies, that Judge is authorized to enter an order reassigning

11

all higher numbered related actions to himself or herself.”)

12

light

13

documents should have been filed, said documents shall be filed

14

no later than 11:59 p.m. on Monday, June 23, 2014.

Therefore,

15

Defendant’s

is

16

withdrawn.

17

decision

18

documents.

19
20

Dated:

of

Plaintiff’s

pending

indication

dismissal

The

motion

issues

on

can

the

be

that

motion,

Notice

(ECF

re-noticed

referenced

June 18, 2014

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

of

No.

for

Notice

Related

6),

hearing
of

Cases

deemed

after

Related

In

a

Cases