Lam et al v. Newsom et al

Filing 23

ORDER Denying Motion to Consolidate. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 9/9/2011. (hlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/9/2011)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

ALFRED LAM, et al.,
Plaintiff(s),

8
9

ORDER DENYING MOTION
TO CONSOLIDATE

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, et al.,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

v.

No. C 10-4641 PJH

12

Defendant(s).
_______________________________/

13
Before the court is plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate this case with previously-filed
14
case Alfred Lam, et al., v. City and County of San Francisco, C 08-4702, in which plaintiffs
15
seek to add the same claims to the previously-filed case that they unsuccessfully sought to
16
add by way of a prior motion to supplement the third amended complaint. As stated at the
17
case management conference on September 8, 2011, the court views the attempted
18
consolidation as a means of achieving what plaintiffs could not achieve by way of their
19
motion to supplement. Because discovery has closed in the 2008 case and it is now ready
20
for dispositive motions and trial and because discovery has just commenced in this case,
21
the motion is DENIED. The October 5, 2011 date for hearing on the motion to consolidate
22
is VACATED.
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
Dated: September 9, 2011
25
26
27
28

______________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge