Filed: Mar. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: ORDER CONSOLIDATING SINGH AND RICH CASES DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On March 24, 2017, counsel in the above-captioned cases (1) Jabir Singh et al. v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al. , Case No. 1:15-cv-01497-DAD-BAM (" Singh case"); and (2) Nicholas E. Rich v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al. , Case No. 1:16-cv-01900-DAD-BAM (" Rich case") filed a stipulation seeking to consolidate the two related cases. (Doc. No. 77 at 3-4.) Therein, the parties also represent
Summary: ORDER CONSOLIDATING SINGH AND RICH CASES DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . On March 24, 2017, counsel in the above-captioned cases (1) Jabir Singh et al. v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al. , Case No. 1:15-cv-01497-DAD-BAM (" Singh case"); and (2) Nicholas E. Rich v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al. , Case No. 1:16-cv-01900-DAD-BAM (" Rich case") filed a stipulation seeking to consolidate the two related cases. (Doc. No. 77 at 3-4.) Therein, the parties also represent ..
More
ORDER CONSOLIDATING SINGH AND RICH CASES
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
On March 24, 2017, counsel in the above-captioned cases (1) Jabir Singh et al. v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-01497-DAD-BAM ("Singh case"); and (2) Nicholas E. Rich v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-01900-DAD-BAM ("Rich case") filed a stipulation seeking to consolidate the two related cases. (Doc. No. 77 at 3-4.) Therein, the parties also represent that plaintiffs' counsel in Latrina Phillips v. Roadrunner Intermodal Services, LLC et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-00164-DAD-BAM ("Phillips case") have not yet decided whether the Phillips case should be consolidated with the Singh and Rich cases. (Id. at 3.)
Pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "[i]f actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may: (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions; (2) consolidate the actions; or (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay." In exercising the court's discretion, the court "weighs the saving of time and effort consolidation would produce against any inconvenience, delay, or expense that it would cause." Huene v. United States, 743 F.2d 703, 704 (9th Cir. 1984). Here, the court finds that the Singh and Rich actions involve the same or similar parties, claims and questions of fact or law, and that consolidation will avoid unnecessary costs and duplication of proceedings. Good cause appearing and pursuant to the parties' stipulation, Case No. 1:15-cv-01497-DAD-BAM and
Accordingly,
1) The above-referenced related cases Singh and Rich are consolidated for all purposes, including trial, pursuant to Rule 42(a);
2) The Clerk of the Court is directed to file this order in both the Singh and Rich cases;
3) Going forward, the parties and the Clerk of the Court are directed to file documents under only the lead case number. Future captions should indicate the lead case number followed by the member case number as follows:
Lead Case: 1:15-cv-01497-DAD-BAM
Member Case: 1:16-cv-01900-DAD-BAM
IT IS SO ORDERED.
