Cowley et al v. Cabela's Outdoor Adventures, Inc. et al
Filing
38
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -By December 18, 2012, the parties shall inform the court whether they would like this case transferred to the District of Alaska for further proceedings, or whether they would like this case dismissed without prejudice. If the parties fail to respond by December 18, 2012, the court will dismiss this matter without prejudice and without further notice. ( Case Management Deadline set for 12/18/2012). Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (MKR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
ERIC COWLEY, and GILLIAN
COWLEY,
Plaintiffs,
v.
CABELA’S OUTDOOR
ADVENTURES, INC., et al.
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
8:11CV325
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on its own motion. On November 30, 2012, the
Defendants filed a Status Report in accordance with the court’s September 27, 2012,
Memorandum and Order. (Filing No. 35.) In the Status Report, Defendants state that on
November 27, 2012, the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
granted a motion to consolidate and transfer two cases identical to this matter to the United
States District Court for the District of Alaska. (Id.) On December 3, 2012, the Western
District of Washington sent this court a Notice of its order granting defendants’ motion to
consolidate and transfer. (Filing No. 37.) In the order, the Western District of Washington
states:
[B]efore the Court are two identical cases: the case originally filed in this
District, No. 2:11-cv-01582-RSM, and the case originally filed in the District
of Alaska, No. 2:11-cv-1811-RSM. The third case, which is also identical,
remains in the District of Nebraska but is stayed until this Court rules on
Defendants’ current Motion to Consolidate and Transfer to Alaska.
...
Plaintiffs voluntarily brought three identical claims that name the same
defendants in three different forums. The Defendants have agreed to litigate
in one of Plaintiffs’ chosen forums, the District of Alaska. Although the Court
makes no ruling on whether it has personal jurisdiction over Roberts, Alaska
clearly has personal jurisdiction over all parties. Rather than expend court
time and resources on determining whether Western District of Washington is
an appropriate forum, the Court can simply transfer the case to the District of
Alaska. The parties agree to dismiss Pawlak with prejudice and the Court
finds dismissal appropriate. Thus, transfer to the District of Alaska will serve
the interest of justice.
(Filing No. 37 at CM/ECF pp. 3, 8-9.) In light of this order, and because this matter is
identical to the two cases that were consolidated and transferred to the District of Alaska, the
parties are directed to inform the court whether they would like this case transferred to the
District of Alaska for further proceedings, or whether they would like this case dismissed
without prejudice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
By December 18, 2012, the parties shall inform the court whether they would
like this case transferred to the District of Alaska for further proceedings, or whether they
would like this case dismissed without prejudice.
2.
If the parties fail to respond by December 18, 2012, the court will dismiss this
matter without prejudice and without further notice.
3.
The Clerk of the court is directed to terminate the pending motion associated
with filing no. 37.
DATED this 12th day of December, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for
the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services
or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third
parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any
hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect
the opinion of the court.
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?