Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00575/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00575-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Dispute

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GRANITE OUTLET, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

HARTFORD CASUALTY INSURANCE 

COMPANY, Inc., and Does 1 to 

10, Inclusive,

Defendant.

2:14-cv-00575-GEB-KJN 

ORDER REQUIRING NOTICE OF 

RELATED CASES TO BE FILED;

DEEMING DEFENDANT’S DISMISSAL 

MOTION WITHDRAWN

This Order issues after consideration of the following 

statement in Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s motion to 

dismiss:

We . . . bring to the court's attention the 

following related case: plaintiff had a 

pending federal civil rights against 

Christine Baker, Director of the Department 

of Industrial Relations, . . . Granite Outlet 

v. Christine Baker, USDC EDCA Case No. 14-cv00124-TLN-EFB, alleging that the appeal bond 

requirements of Labor Code section 98.2(b) 

and other practices of the Labor Commissioner 

are unconstitutional. We will file a Notice 

of Related case shortly.

(Pls.’ Opp’n to Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss, 20: 10-16, ECF No. 13.)

However, Local Rule 123(b) prescribes: “Counsel who has reason to 

believe that an action on file . . . may be related to another 

action on file . . . shall promptly file in each action and serve 

Case 2:14-cv-00575-TLN-EFB Document 14 Filed 06/19/14 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

on all parties in each action a Notice of Related Cases.” E.D. 

Cal. L.R. 123(b) (emphasis added). It should be evident that a 

purpose of this rule is to provide the judge making the related 

case decision time to make that decision before a judge assigned 

the later-filed case expends judicial resources deciding a matter

in the later-filed case. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 123(c) (“If the Judge 

to whom the action with the lower or lowest number has been 

assigned determines that assignment of the actions to a single 

Judge is likely to effect a savings of judicial effort or other 

economies, that Judge is authorized to enter an order reassigning 

all higher numbered related actions to himself or herself.”) In 

light of Plaintiff’s indication that Notice of Related Cases 

documents should have been filed, said documents shall be filed 

no later than 11:59 p.m. on Monday, June 23, 2014. Therefore, 

Defendant’s pending dismissal motion, (ECF No. 6), is deemed 

withdrawn. The motion can be re-noticed for hearing after a 

decision issues on the referenced Notice of Related Cases 

documents.

Dated: June 18, 2014

Case 2:14-cv-00575-TLN-EFB Document 14 Filed 06/19/14 Page 2 of 2