United States of America v. Cade Corporation
Filing
7
ORDER by Judge James Donato denying 5 Motion to Relate Case. (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2016)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
ROZANN M. STENSHOEL - SOUSA,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
ORDER DENYING RELATION OF
CASE
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Re: Dkt. No. 23
Defendant.
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No. 16-mc-80009-JD
12
13
The Court has received the United States’ motion to consider relating the case United
14
States v. Cade Corporation, No. 16-cv-1996-EJD, currently pending in the Northern District of
15
California before Judge Davila, to Stenshoel-Sousa v. United States, No. 16-mc-80009-JD. Dkt.
16
No. 23. The United States asserts the cases are related because “they concern the same IRS
17
summons” seeking records about Cade Corporation’s ownership. Id. No timely opposition has
18
been filed.
19
The Court denies the motion because it appears that relating the cases at this time may
20
cause, rather than prevent, “an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense.” See Civ.
21
L.R. 3-12(a). Judge Davila has already determined that the United States’ petition shows good
22
reasons for enforcement of the summons, issued an order directing Cade Corporation to show
23
cause why it should not be compelled to respond, and set a hearing on the matter for July 7, 2016.
24
Cade, Dkt. No. 3 (N.D. Cal. May 24, 2016). Relating the cases at this time would cause this
25
schedule to be vacated and reset before the Court, causing unnecessary delay, duplication of effort,
26
27
28
1
and expense to the parties. Accordingly, the motion to relate the cases is denied without prejudice,
2
pending the outcome of Judge Davila’s order.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 1, 2016
5
6
JAMES DONATO
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?