Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00717/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00717-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1334 Bankruptcy Appeal

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PDM STEEL SERVICE CENTERS, INC.,

a California Corporation,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

TML DEVELOPMENT LLC, a

Washington limited liability

company; CONXTECH, INC., a

Delaware corporation, and DOES 1

through 20, inclusive,

 Defendants.

________________________________

In re TML Development, LLC

________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2:10-cv-00717-GEB-KJN

ORDER

2010-20088-C-11

Defendant filed a Notice of Related Bankruptcy Case and

Request to Reassign Matter to Bankruptcy Court in this interpleader

action on April 2, 2010, stating “this action is related to a Chapter 11

bankruptcy case currently pending before the United States Bankruptcy

Court, Eastern District, entitled In re TML Development, LLC, Case No.

2010-20088-C-11 (the “Bankruptcy Action”).” (Docket No. 10, 1:22-24.)

Plaintiff consents to the requested reassignment in the parties’ Joint

Status Report filed on June 28, 2010. (Docket No. 12, 4:11-13, 4:21-22.)

Defendant contends this action is “related” to the Bankruptcy

Action under Local Rule 123(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1334 for reasons

including:

Case 2:10-cv-00717-GEB-KJN Document 13 Filed 07/01/10 Page 1 of 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

2

“The steel sale proceeds at issue in the

Interpleader Action constitute property of

[Defendant’s] bankruptcy estate, which is subject

to various claims by [Plaintiff] for a

warehouseman’s lien, and other creditors in

[Defendant’s] bankruptcy. Specifically, [Defendant]

is informed and believes that its primary

creditor(s)... may assert rights to the steel sale

proceeds in the Eastern District bankruptcy case,

which [Defendant] will dispute. [Defendant’s

primary creditors] are not currently parties to the

Interpleader Action, but are active participants in

the Eastern District Bankruptcy Court case where

the Interpleader Action issues can be resolved. [¶]

The respective rights of the parties to the sale

proceeds can be efficiently determined by the

Eastern District Bankruptcy Court, which already

has exclusive jurisdiction over [Defendant’s]

assets including the steel sale proceeds, and the

various creditors who assert rights to those

assets. See 28 U.S.C. § 1334(d)(in a case under

Title 11 the district court...” shall have exclusive

jurisdiction of all property, wherever located, of

the debtor as of the commencement of such case, and

of property of the estate.”). Otherwise, the

parties will have to resolve the issues related to

[Defendant’s] bankruptcy and the steel proceeds in

disparate courts within the Eastern District, with

the attendant duplication of judicial resources and

possibility of inconsistent rulings.

(Docket No. 12, 4:3-10, 4:13-21.)

Since the actions appear related under both Local Rule 123 and

28 U.S.C. § 1334(b), action No. 2:10-cv-00717-GEB-KJN is referred to the

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California

(“Bankruptcy Court”) for all further proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 157.

Any dates currently set in the referred case are vacated. The Clerk

shall file a copy of this order in the Bankruptcy Court Case No. 2010-

20088-C-11.

Dated: June 30, 2010

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:10-cv-00717-GEB-KJN Document 13 Filed 07/01/10 Page 2 of 2