Ansari v. Electronic Document Processing, Inc et al
Filing
44
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RELATE; ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE.(lhklc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/10/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN JOSE DIVISION
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ALLEN ANSARI,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT PROCESSING, )
INC., a California corporation; DUSTIN K.
)
FERRO, individually and in his official capacity; )
and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
Case No.: 5:12-CV-1245-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
RELATE; ORDER CONTINUING
CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE
Plaintiff Allen Ansari has filed an Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases
19
Should Be Related (“Motion to Relate”). ECF No. 43. Plaintiff seeks to relate Holmes v.
20
Electronic Document Processing, Inc., Case No. 5:12-CV-6193-HRL, and Paull v. Electronic
21
Document Processing, Inc., Case No. 5:12-CV-06194-PSG, to the instant action. Plaintiff’s
22
Motion to Relate is DENIED.
23
The Case Management Conference scheduled for December 12, 2012 is hereby continued
24
to February 28, 2013 at 1:30 p.m., the date for the hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike
25
Affirmative Defenses. All case deadlines remain as set forth in the case schedule issued on
26
September 10, 2012. See ECF No. 34.
27
28
1
Case No.: 12-CV-1245
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RELATE; ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
3
4
Dated: December 10, 2012
_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge
5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 12-CV-1245
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RELATE; ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?