Comcast of Sacramento I, LLC et al v. Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission

Filing 54

RELATED CASE ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 8/17/18 ORDERING The actions denominated Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-cv-500 MCE EFB and Sacramento Metropoli tan Cable Television Commission v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-cv-1212 TLN DB, shall be REASSIGNED to the Honorable WILLIAM B. SHUBB. Any dates currently set in the reassigned cases only are hereby VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court make an appropriate adjustment in the assignment of cases to compensate for these reassignments.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

----oo0oo----

11
12
13
14

COMCAST OF SACRAMENTO I, LLC;
COMCAST OF SACRAMENTO II,
LLC; and COMCAST OF
SACRAMENTO III, LLC;
Plaintiffs,

15
16
17
18

v.

No. 2:16-cv-1264 WBS EFB

ORDER RELATING CASES

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN CABLE
TELEVISION COMMISSION and
DOES 1 through 20,
Defendants.

19
20
21
22

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN CABLE
TELEVISION COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,

23
24
25
26

No. 2:18-cv-500 MCE EFB

v.
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
MANAGEMENT, LLC,
Defendant.

27
28
1

1
2

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN CABLE
TELEVISION COMMISSION,

3
4
5
6

No. 2:18-cv-1212 TLN DB

Plaintiff,
v.
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
MANAGEMENT, LLC,
Defendant.

7

----oo0oo----

8

Examination of the above-entitled actions reveals that

9
10

they are related within the meaning of Local Rule 123(a), because

11

all three cases involve disputes regarding the calculation of

12

franchise fees Comcast entities are required to pay to Sacramento

13

Metropolitan Cable Television Commission under the same statutory

14

regime and thus involve similar or identical legal and factual

15

issues.

16

judge is likely to effect a substantial saving of judicial effort

17

and is also likely to be convenient for the parties.

Accordingly, the assignment of the matters to the same

The parties should be aware that relating cases under

18
19

Local Rule 123 merely has the result that the actions are

20

assigned to the same judge; no consolidation of the actions is

21

effected.

22

cases are generally assigned to the judge and magistrate judge to

23

whom the first filed action was assigned.

24

Under the regular practice of this court, related

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the actions denominated

25

Comcast of Sacramento I, LLC v. Sacramento Metropolitan Cable

26

Television Commission, 2:16-cv-1264 WBS EFB; Sacramento

27

Metropolitan Cable Television Commission v. Comcast Cable

28

Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-cv-500 MCE EFB; and
2

1

Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission v. Comcast

2

Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-cv-1212 TLN DB, be,

3

and the same hereby are, deemed related.

4

Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission v. Comcast

5

Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-cv-500 MCE EFB and

6

Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television Commission v. Comcast

7

Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-cv-1212 TLN DB, shall

8

be reassigned to the Honorable WILLIAM B. SHUBB.

9

currently set in the reassigned cases only are hereby VACATED.

10

Henceforth, the captions on documents filed in the reassigned

11

cases shall be shown as Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television

12

Commission v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-

13

cv-500 WBS EFB and Sacramento Metropolitan Cable Television

14

Commission v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, 2:18-

15

cv-1212 WBS EFB.

16

The case denominated

Any dates

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court make

17

an appropriate adjustment in the assignment of cases to

18

compensate for these reassignments.

19

Dated:

August 17, 2018

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3