Robben v. City of South Lake Tahoe et al

Filing 12

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/26/17 ORDERING that the court has received the Notice of Related Cases concerning the above- captioned cases filed December 15, 2016. The court has, however, determined that it is inappropriate to relate and reassign the cases set forth above, and therefore declines to do so.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TODD ROBBEN, 12 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-2695 MCE KJN P Plaintiff, v. EL DORADO COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 TODD ROBBEN, Plaintiff, 18 19 20 v. CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, et al., Defendants. 21 22 TODD ROBBEN, 25 26 No. 2:16-cv-2697 JAM KJN P Plaintiff, 23 24 No. 2:16-cv-2696 WBS EFB P v. EL DORADO COUNTY, et al., Defendants. 27 28 1 1 TODD ROBBEN, 2 Plaintiff, 3 4 v. EL DORADO COUNTY, et al., 5 6 Defendants. TODD ROBBEN, 7 v. GLENN NORLING, 10 11 Defendant. TODD ROBBEN, 12 15 v. CALAVERAS COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, et al., Defendants. 16 17 TODD ROBBEN, No. 2:16-cv-2742 CMK P Petitioner, 18 v. 19 20 No. 2:16-cv-2884 JAM CMK P Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:16-cv-2699 WBS EFB P Plaintiff, 8 9 No. 2:16-cv-2698 JAM CMK P JOHN D’AGOSTINI, Respondent. 21 22 ORDER 23 The court has received the Notice of Related Cases concerning the above-captioned cases 24 25 filed December 15, 2016. See Local Rule 123. The court has, however, determined that it is 26 inappropriate to relate and reassign the cases set forth above,1 and therefore declines to do so. 27 28 1 Plaintiff also sought to relate Robben v. D’Agostini, No. 2:16-cv-2723 JAM GGH P (petition for writ of mandamus). However, on January 5, 2017, case no. 2:16-cv-2723 JAM GGH was 2 1 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 26, 2017 3 4 5 /robben.862 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 terminated pursuant to plaintiff’s notice of voluntary dismissal. Id., ECF No. 8. 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?