National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Pinon

Filing 50

ORDER CONSOLIDATING RELATED CASES. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 10/10/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/11/2013)

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

9
10

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

1

12
13

Plaintiff,

No. CV 12-03396 RS;
ORDER CONSOLIDATING
RELATED CASES

v.

14 FIDEL PINON, an individual
15
Defendants.
16 ____________________________________/
17

AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM AND
18 COUNTER-CLAIM.
____________________________________/
19
20 BLANCHE CRIDER, an individual,
21
22

Plaintiff,
v.

23

PINON TRUCKING, THE NATIONAL
24 RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
d.b.a. AMTRAK, BNSF RAILWAY, and
25 DOES 1-25, inclusive,
26
27

Defendants./
____________________________________/

28
CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER

CV 13-01670 RS;

KAHRLUHS VAUGHN,

2

Plaintiff,

3 v.
4 THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, a
5 government entity; STATE OF
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
6 TRANSPORTATION a/k/a CALTRANS, a
government entity; NATIONAL RAILROAD
7 PASSENGER CORPORATION a/k/a
8 AMTRAK, a corporation; DOE TRAIN
OPERATOR, an individual; BNSF, a
9 corporation; PINON TRUCKING, a
corporation; FIDEL PINON, an Individual;
10 and DOES 1 through 100, Inclusive,
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

1

Defendants.
___________________________________
13 AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM AND
14 COUNTER-CLAIM.
___________________________________
15
MICHAEL DANG, an individual,
16
12

17

CV 13-02182 RS;

Plaintiff,

18 v.
19 NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION, T/D/B/A/ AMTRAK,
20
PINON TRUCKING, BNSF RAILWAY
21 COMPANY, and DOES 1-30,
22
23
24

Defendants.
___________________________________
CV 13-03581 RS

STEPHEN LOPES,

25
26

Plaintiff,

27

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER

28
2

v.

2 FIDEL PINON dba PINON TRUCKING;
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
3 CORPORATION dba AMTRAK; BNSF
RAILWAY COMPANY and DOES 1-25,
4
5

Defendants.
6 ___________________________________
7 AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM AND
8 COUNTER-CLAIM
___________________________________
9
All parties seek consolidation with the exception of plaintiff Blanche Crider in Case No.
10
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

1

C 12-03396. Each of the Actions satisfies the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 42(a).

12

Additionally, the parties in the Actions are substantially the same. Upon consideration of the

13

request, the motion to consolidate will be granted. By Order dated November 13, 2012, the

14

Court found that the above-entitled actions are related. Accordingly, the Actions are

15

consolidated into In re September 30, 2011 Train Accident, C 12-03396. All filings hereafter

16

shall be made exclusively in Case No. C 12-03396. The Clerk shall close the files of the other

17

case captioned above.

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21

DATED: 10/10/2013
_______________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27

CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER

28
3