Guidry et al v. U.S. Department of the Interior et al

Filing 95

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting 91 Motion to Relate Case (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/28/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

Northern District of California

United States District Court

11

BRIAN SCOTT GUIDRY, et al.,

12
13

Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No.: 12-cv-5639 JSC
ORDER GRANTING
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
RELATE

14
15
16

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

ALCATRAZ CRUISES, LLC

19
20

Cross-Claimant,
v.

21
22
23
24

GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS
CONSERVANCY,
Cross-Defendant.

25
26

Now pending before the Court is Defendant/Cross-Claimant Alcatraz Cruises, LLC’s

27

(“Alcatraz”) administrative motion to relate cases. (Dkt. No. 91.) Defendant United States of

28

America has joined the motion. (Dkt. No. 92.) An action is related to another when: “(1) The actions

1

concern substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event; and (2) It appears likely that

2

there will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the

3

cases are conducted before different Judges.” N.D. Civ. L.R. 3-12(a). Both this action and the action

4

to be related (American International Group, Inc. v. Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy, 13-

5

5568) concern the same underlying personal injury incident, and the resulting dispute as to Golden

6

Gate National Parks Conservancy’s (“the Conservancy”) liability for its alleged failure to name

7

Alcatraz as an additional insured. Thus, both actions concern substantially the same parties, property,

8

transaction, or event. Further, if the cases are conducted before different judges, there will likely be

9

an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense given the similarities between the cases.

Northern District of California

Although the Conservancy filed an opposition to the motion in the 13-5568 action, it did not

11
United States District Court

10

file the opposition in this action—the lower-numbered action—as required by the Local Rules. See

12

N.D. Cal. L.R. 3-12(e) (“Any opposition to or support of a Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should

13

be Related must be filed in the earliest filed case.”) In any event, the objection is unpersuasive as the

14

Conservancy’s argument—that the complaint in the 13-5568 action fails to state a claim—is

15

irrelevant to the standard for related cases under Local Rule 3-12.

16

Alcatraz’s motion to relate cases is accordingly GRANTED.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20

Dated: January 28, 2014
_________________________________
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2