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)

Download PDF
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?