Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

CARDINALI v. PLUSFOUR, INC., 2:16-cv-02046-JAD-NJK. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170927f22 Visitors: 4
Filed: Sep. 26, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 26, 2017
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is Defendant Experian's motion to transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1404(a). Docket No. 47. 1 Plaintiff filed a response and Experian filed a reply. See Docket Nos. 51, 53. Experian filed supplemental authority, see Docket No. 55, see also Docket No. 56 (allowing supplemental authority), and Plaintiff has filed a response to the supplemental authority, Docket No. 59. The Court held a hearing on the motion on September
More

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant Experian's motion to transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Docket No. 47.1 Plaintiff filed a response and Experian filed a reply. See Docket Nos. 51, 53. Experian filed supplemental authority, see Docket No. 55, see also Docket No. 56 (allowing supplemental authority), and Plaintiff has filed a response to the supplemental authority, Docket No. 59. The Court held a hearing on the motion on September 25, 2017.

The motion to transfer is premised in significant part on the contention that this case is better handled in the Northern District of Illinois in light of an overlapping nationwide class action being litigated in that court. See, e.g., Docket No. 53 at 9 (asserting that Experian would "prefer to not defend the same nationwide class case in two locations in front of two different courts"). In the latest filing in relation to this motion, however, Plaintiff has attached a minute order from that court allowing the plaintiff there to withdraw his class action allegations and his motion to certify a class. See Docket No. 59-2. Further, Experian represented at the hearing that the primary case on which it premised its motion to transfer has now been dismissed.

In light of the changed landscape, the pending motion to transfer is DENIED without prejudice. To the extent Experian continues to believe circumstances warrant transfer, it may file a renewed motion to transfer more specifically focused on the current state of affairs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Deciding a motion to transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) is a matter within the authority of a magistrate judge. See, e.g., Pavao v. Unifund CCR Partners, 934 F.Supp.2d 1238, 1241 n.1 (S.D. Cal. 2013) (collecting cases).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer