Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00117/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00117-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLES LEE WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROY SCHEINGART, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-03013-JCS 

(also filed in Case Nos. 04-cv-0117-MMC, 

06-cv-5825-MMC, and 09-cv-3194-MMC)

ORDER OF SUA SPONTE REFERRAL 

AS TO WHETHER CASES ARE 

RELATED

Civil Local Rule 3-12(c) provides that “[w]henever a Judge believes that a case pending 

before that Judge is related to another case, the Judge may refer the case to the Judge assigned to 

the lowest-numbered case with a request that the Judge assigned to the lowest-numbered case 

consider whether the cases are related.”

Charles Lee Williams filed a Petition and other documents in this action challenging the 

propriety of his 2002 arrest for armed robbery, 2003 conviction in state court, and subsequent 

incarceration. Williams has previously filed two petitions for habeas corpus and a claim under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 related to his arrest. Each of those cases was assigned to the Honorable Maxine 

Chesney, United States District Judge, who dismissed Williams’s § 1983 claim because it would 

imply the invalidity of his conviction, denied his first habeas petition on the merits, and dismissed 

his second habeas petition for failure to obtain leave from the Ninth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2244. 

Because the present case and the previous three cases all arise from the same arrest and 

conviction, this action is REFERRED to Judge Chesney pursuant to Rule 3-12(c) for a 

determination of whether this action is related to any or all of the following cases: (1) Williams v. 

City of Oakland, No. 04-cv-00117-MMC; (2) Williams v. Malfi, No. 06-cv-5825-MMC; and/or 

(3) Williams v. Walker, No. 09-cv-3194-MMC.

Case 3:04-cv-00117-MMC Document 17 Filed 10/27/15 Page 1 of 2
2

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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Any party may file a response, opposition, or statement in support of relating the cases no 

later than November 2, 2015.

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 27, 2015

______________________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

Chief Magistrate Judge

 

1

The undersigned has also issued a Report and Recommendation in this case, recommending that 

the case be dismissed without leave to amend. If Judge Chesney determines that the cases are not 

related, this case will be reassigned to a randomly selected United States district judge for further 

proceedings, including action on that recommendation.

Case 3:04-cv-00117-MMC Document 17 Filed 10/27/15 Page 2 of 2