[PROPOSED] ORDER

JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court hereby grants the following relief:

WHEREFORE, on December 18, 2012, Plaintiff Maxine Ruff filed a motion for administrative relief to relate cases pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12 and to consolidate cases pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) in the case Langone v. Del Monte Corp Corporation, et al., 12-CV-04671-JSW ("Langone") (Langone Docket No. 6; "Motion to Consolidate"); and

WHEREFORE, on January 9, 2013, Defendants Del Monte Corporation and Milo's Kitchen, LLC filed their Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Administrative Relief to Relate Cases Pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-12 and Consolidate Cases Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a) in Langone (Langone Docket No. 15; "Opposition to Consolidation"). Defendants also filed their Motion to Stay Consideration of Plaintiffs Motion to Consolidate in Langone (Langone Docket No. 16; "Motion to Stay"), and incorporated the arguments set forth therein into their Opposition to Consolidation; and

WHEREFORE, on January 23, 2013, Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Defendant Del Monte Corporation and Milo's Kitchen, LLC's Motion to Stay Consideration of Plaintiff Ruff's Motion to Consolidate in Langone (Langone Docket. No. 22); and WHEREFORE, on January 24, 2013, this Court issued its Order Granting Motion and Stipulation to Relate; Denying Motion to Stay; and Order Setting Hearing Date on Pending Motions in Langone (Langone Docket No. 28), and on January 25, 2013 entered the same order in two additional cases ordered related to Langone, including the instant action Ruff v. Del Monte Corporation, et al., 12-CV-05251-JSW ("Ruff") and Funke v. Del Monte Corporation, et al., 12-CV-05323-JSW ("Funke") (Ruff Docket No. 21; Funke Docket No. 16) (hereinafter, the "Order"), stating "Plaintiffs' administrative motion to consolidate is not a proper subject of an administrative motion. Because Defendants have filed an opposition, the Court shall not deny the motion on procedural grounds. Plaintiffs shall file a reply to the motion to consolidate by no later than February 8, 2013," denying Defendants' Motion to Stay, and further stating that "The Court shall consider Plaintiffs' motion to consolidate in conjunction with the motions to transfer and dismiss in the Ruff case [] and the Funke case [] on Friday, April 12 2013, at 9:00 a.m."; and

WHEREFORE, on February 6, 2013, Plaintiffs filed their Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Motion to Consolidate (Langone Dkt. No. 34); and

WHEREFORE, on March 20, 2013, Plaintiffs filed an Administrative Motion Requesting Consideration of Motion to Consolidate concurrently with the Declaration of Edmund S. Aronowitz Re Administrative Motion Requesting Consideration of Motion to Consolidate;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion Requesting Consideration of Motion to Consolidate is GRANTED and the Court shall accordingly consider the Motion to Consolidate fully submitted without further motion or briefing by any party and shall hear and consider all motions, including Plaintiffs' motion to consolidate Ruff v. Del Monte Corporation, et al., 12-CV-05251-JSW and Funke v. Del Monte Corporation, et al., 12-CV-05323-JSW with each other, on April 12, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.