Campbell v. Feld Entertainment, Inc et al
Filing
70
ORDER Re: Consolidation; Continuing Case Management Conference; Vacating Hearing on Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 6/18/2013. (lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/18/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
SAN JOSE DIVISION
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
SHANNON CAMPBELL,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
FELD ENTERTAINMENT, INC., d/b/a
)
RINGLING BROS. AND BARNUM &
)
BAILEY CIRCUS, RINGLING BROS. CIRCUS)
GENERAL MANAGER JAMES DENNIS,
)
RINGLING BROS. CIRCUS OPERATIONS
)
MANAGER MATTHEW GILLET, and Does 1 )
through 10,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
MARK ENNIS,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
FELD ENTERTAINMENT, INC., et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK
13-CV-00233-LHK
ORDER RE CONSOLIDATION;
CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE; VACATING HEARING
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Pursuant to Rule 42(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court hereby
23
ORDERS the above-captioned cases, Campbell v. Feld Entertainment Inc. et al, Case No. 12-
24
04233-LHK (the “Campbell” case), and Ennis v. Feld Entertainment Inc., et al., Case No. 13-
25
00233-LHK (the “Ennis” case), to be consolidated for purposes of motions, discovery, and
26
scheduling. The parties shall be entitled to a reasonable expansion of page and discovery limits, as
27
28
1
Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK
13-CV-00233-LHK
ORDER RE CONSOLIDATION; CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;
VACATING HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
1
necessary, in light of this consolidation. The issue of consolidating the two cases for trial will be
2
determined at a later date.
3
Plaintiffs in the Campbell and Ennis cases are hereby ORDERED to file one consolidated
4
amended complaint by July 9, 2013. No new causes of action or parties will be added, beyond
5
what is included in Plaintiffs’ current complaints. If Defendants choose to file a motion to dismiss
6
the consolidated complaint, the consolidated motion to dismiss shall be filed by August 12, 2013,
7
and shall be set for hearing on the same date as the currently scheduled motion to dismiss in the
8
Ennis case, September 19, 2013, at 1:30 p.m.
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
9
The pending Case Management Conference in the Campbell case, currently set for June 20,
10
2013, is hereby CONTINUED to September 19, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. A joint case management
11
conference statement for the consolidated cases is to be filed by the parties no later than one week
12
prior.
13
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss in the Campbell case, currently set for a hearing on June 20,
14
2013, is hereby DENIED as moot in light of the parties’ Report on Order re Amended Complaint
15
and Consolidation. See ECF No. 69. Accordingly, the hearing is VACATED.
16
Plaintiffs in the Campbell and Ennis cases are also ORDERED to file one consolidated
17
motion for preliminary injunction by July 15, 2013. Accordingly, Plaintiff in the Campbell case
18
shall withdraw the currently pending motion for preliminary injunction by June 20, 2013. See ECF
19
No. 51. Plaintiffs’ consolidated motion for preliminary injunction may not exceed 30 pages. By
20
July 29, 2013, Defendants shall file any consolidated opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for
21
preliminary injunction. Any such opposition shall not exceed 30 pages. Plaintiffs’ consolidated
22
reply in support of the motion for preliminary injunction shall be due by August 5, 2013, and shall
23
not exceed 18 pages. The preliminary injunction hearing will remain as set on August 15, 2013,
24
although the Court will try to rule on this motion in advance of that date.
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
Dated: June 18, 2013
_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge
27
28
2
Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK
13-CV-00233-LHK
ORDER RE CONSOLIDATION; CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;
VACATING HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
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?