Kinney v. State Bar of California et al

Filing 64

ORDER RE: OBJECTION TO RELATED CASE ORDERS. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 12, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2016)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

CHARLES KINNEY,
Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 13-cv-01396-MMC
ORDER RE: OBJECTION TO
RELATED CASE ORDERS

v.
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13
14

The Court is in receipt of plaintiff's "Objection to Related Case Orders Entered in

15

the Non-Pending CV16-1260," filed August 9, 2016. Having read and considered the

16

Objection, the Court rules as follows:

17

1. To the extent the Objection challenges orders by Magistrate Judge Laurel

18

Beeler finding (a) Civil Case No. 16-2018 MEJ is related to Civil Case No. 16-1260 LB,

19

and (b) Civil Case Nos. 16-1260 LB and 16-2278 HSG are related to Civil Case No. 14-

20

2187 LB, the Objection is hereby OVERRULED, for the reason that said objection is

21

procedurally improper, the undersigned not been assigned any such case. See Civil L.R.

22

3-12(d)-(e) (providing motion to relate cases must list title and case number of each

23

apparently related case, and any opposition must be filed in the lowest-numbered of

24

those cases).

25

2. To the extent the Objection can be construed as a motion to relate any or all of

26

the above-referenced five cases to Civil Case No. 13-1396 MMC, the motion is hereby

27

DENIED, as plaintiff has failed to show Civil Case No. 13-1396 MMC and the above-

28

listed four cases, or any of them, concern "the same parties, property, transaction or

1
2

event" as did. See Civil L.R. 3-12(a)(1).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4

Dated: August 12, 2016

MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2