Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00941/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00941-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

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

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON VISION CARE 

INC,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-00941-HSG 

ORDER RELATING CASES

Re: Dkt. No. 53

Before the Court is an administrative motion to consider whether Cunha v. Alcon 

Laboratories, Inc. et al., numbered 4:15-cv-01413-KAW and filed in this District, is related to the 

above-captioned matter. The time to file an opposition has passed. 

The Court finds that the actions “concern substantially the same parties, property, 

transaction, or event,” and that “[i]t appears likely that there will be an unduly burdensome 

duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are conducted before different 

Judges.” Civ. L.R. 3-12(a). Accordingly, the Court determines that 4:15-cv-01413-KAW is

related to 3:15-cv-00941-HSG and reassigns it to the undersigned for all future proceedings.

The parties are instructed that any future filings in the reassigned case are to bear the 

initials of the undersigned immediately after the case number. The case management conference 

in the reassigned case will be rescheduled by the Court. The parties shall adjust the dates for the 

conference, disclosures and report required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16 and 26 

accordingly.

//

//

//

Case 4:15-cv-00941-HSG Document 56 Filed 04/07/15 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

Unless otherwise ordered, any noticed dates for motion hearings are vacated and must be 

re-noticed by the moving party before the undersigned. Any deadlines set by the ADR Local 

Rules remain in effect. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 7, 2015

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:15-cv-00941-HSG Document 56 Filed 04/07/15 Page 2 of 2