Morvant et al v. P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc. et al

Filing 29

ORDER FINDING CASES ARE NOT RELATED re 25 MOTION to Relate Case filed by P.F. Chang's III, LLC, P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc.. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 28, 2011. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15

Plaintiffs,

18

P.F. CHANG’S CHINA BISTRO, INC., P.F. CHANG’S
III, LLC, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.
/
ZACHARY MORVANT, JEAN ANDREWS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

19
20
21
22
23
24

ORDER FINDING CASES
ARE NOT RELATED

v.

16
17

No. C 10-01937 WHA
No. C 11-05405 DMR

IAN DUBEE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,

v.
P.F. CHANG’S CHINA BISTRO, INC., P.F. CHANG’S
III, LLC, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.
/
Defendants P.F.Chang’s China Bistro, Inc, and P.F. Chang’s III, LLC, filed an

25

administrative motion to consider whether Dubee v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Inc., et al., C 10-

26

01937 WHA, should be related to Morvant v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Inc., et al., C 11-05405

27

DMR. By order dated October 28, 2011, the Morvant action was transferred from the United

28

States District Court for the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California.
Transfer was ordered based on the conclusion that transfer to the Northern District would be in

1

the interest of the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the conclusion that the

2

undersigned judge has familiarity with the case and applicable law due to the fact that he presided

3

over the Dubee action, which the order found has similar facts, claims, counsel, and purported

4

class as the Morvant action.

5

Having reviewed the two case files, the undersigned judge finds that these two actions are

6

not related within the meaning of Civil Local Rule 3-12. The only issues the undersigned judge

7

addressed in the earlier action were related to a motion to transfer and two discovery disputes,

8

both of which involved disputes related to the preliminary steps in the discovery process —

9

namely initial disclosures and responses to the first set of interrogatories and request for
production of documents. Because the Dubee action settled before the undersigned judge was

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

able to reach issues related to the merits of the underlying class allegations, no duplication of

12

effort will result from leaving the assignment of the newer action undisturbed, even given the

13

above-stated similarities between the two actions.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

Dated: November 28, 2011.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2