Shackleton v. Bauer et al

Filing 35

MINUTE ORDER re: 32 MOTION to Consolidate Cases and reconsider May 10, 2010 order filed by Brandon Bohland, and 20 in 2:10-cv-00564-MJP) MOTION to Consolidate Cases by Carey Souda; signed by Docket Clerk M Duett at the direction of Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (SC)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 MINUTE ORDER The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable Marsha J. Pechman: The Court currently has pending before it two similar Motions for Consolidation and Reconsideration: one by Plaintiff Souda in the consolidated matter (Dkt. No. 20) and one in the Bohland matter (Dkt. No. 5 in C10-1213; Dkt. No. 32 in C10-564). The motion in C10-564 is ripe; the Bohland motion does not come ripe until August 13, 2010. As the issues are identical in both motions (is consolidation appropriate and should the Court v. BAUER, et al., Defendant(s). _______________________________________ IN RE CELL THERAPEUTICS, INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION _______________________________________ This document relates to: All Actions. _______________________________________ NO. C10-564MJP MINUTE ORDER BOHLAND, Plaintiff(s), NO. C10-1213MJP UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 reconsider its order of May 7, 2010 appointing lead and liaison counsel in the consolidated matter?), the Court will not require responses from the Defendants above and beyond what has already been filed in C10-564. If nothing further is filed, the Court will assume that the responses are identical. The parties are further advised that the ruling on these motions will not be forthcoming until September. Filed this 6th day of August, 2010. BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk By /s Mary Duett Deputy Clerk MINUTE ORDER

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?