McClure v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, 1:18-cv-00176-DAD-SKO (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190204757
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jan. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . The following cases are currently pending before the undersigned: • McClure v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, et al. (No. 1:18-cv-00176-DAD-SKO); and • Hubbard v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, et al. (No. 1:18-cv-00917-DAD-SKO). On January 8, 2019, the undersigned related and reassigned the latter-filed case and permitted the parties to show cause why these cases should not be consolidat
Summary: ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . The following cases are currently pending before the undersigned: • McClure v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, et al. (No. 1:18-cv-00176-DAD-SKO); and • Hubbard v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, et al. (No. 1:18-cv-00917-DAD-SKO). On January 8, 2019, the undersigned related and reassigned the latter-filed case and permitted the parties to show cause why these cases should not be consolidate..
More
ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
The following cases are currently pending before the undersigned:
• McClure v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, et al. (No. 1:18-cv-00176-DAD-SKO); and
• Hubbard v. Prisoner Transportation Services of America, LLC, et al. (No. 1:18-cv-00917-DAD-SKO).
On January 8, 2019, the undersigned related and reassigned the latter-filed case and permitted the parties to show cause why these cases should not be consolidated. (Doc. No. 64.) To date, the parties have not responded to the court's order, and the time in which to do so has now passed.
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 its 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 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. Thus, good cause exists to consolidate these cases.
Accordingly,
1. The above-referenced cases shall be consolidated for all purposes, including trial, pursuant to Rule 42(a);
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file this order in each of the above-referenced cases; and
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: 1:18-cv-00176-DAD-SKO
Member Case: 1:18-cv-00917-DAD-SKO
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
