United States of America v. Approximately $51,498.00 in U.S. Currency et al
Filing
2
RELATED CASE ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 7/5/16 ORDERING examination of the above-entitled cases reveals they are related within the meaning of Local Rule 123. Therefore, action 2:16-MC-00120-TLN-AC is reassigned to th e undersigned district judge. Henceforth the caption for future filings on the reassigned case shall show the initials "GEB-AC". The Clerk of the Court shall make appropriate adjustment in the assignment of cases as a result of this reassignment. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
8
9
10
11
12
No. 2:16-MC-00120-TLN-AC
Plaintiff,
v.
RELATED CASE ORDER
APPROXIMATELY $51,498.00 IN
U.S. CURRENCY, and
MISCELLANEOUS FIREARMS AND
AMMUNITION,
13
Defendants.
14
15
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
16
17
18
No. 2:16-CR-00037-GEB
Plaintiff,
v.
THOMAS CHADD,
Defendant.
19
20
On June 27, 2016, the United States of America filed a
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
“Notice
of
Related
Cases”
in
which
it
states:
“the
civil
forfeiture action and the criminal action arise from the same law
enforcement investigation and, therefore, involve substantially
the same events, transactions, and parties.” (ECF No. 33.)
Examination of the above-entitled cases reveals they
are related within the meaning of Local Rule 123. Under the
regular practice of this court, a later filed related case is
1
1
generally assigned to the judge to whom the first filed case is
2
assigned. Therefore, action 2:16-MC-00120-TLN-AC is reassigned to
3
the undersigned district judge. Henceforth the caption for future
4
filings on the reassigned case shall show the initials “GEB-AC”.
5
The
6
adjustment
in
7
Dated:
the
of
the
assignment
Court
reassignment.
8
Clerk
of
July 5, 2016
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
shall
cases
as
make
a
appropriate
result
of
this
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?