Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-md-02555/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-md-02555-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

IN RE: COCA-COLA PRODUCTS 

MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES 

LITIGATION (NO. II) 

This document applies to all actions. 

Case No. 14-md-02555-JSW 

AMENDED ORDER ON MOTION TO 

CONSOLIDATE1

Re: Docket No. 84 

Now before the Court for consideration is the motion to consolidate filed by the Plaintiffs 

in the following cases: Engurasoff v. The Coca-Cola Company, et al., 13-cv-3990; Nobles v. The 

Coca-Cola Company, et al., 13-cv-5017; Merritt v. The Coca-Cola Company, et al., 14-cv-1067; 

and Aumiller v. The Coca-Cola Company, et al., 14-cv-1447 (the “Moving Plaintiffs”). The 

“Non-Moving Plaintiffs” are Plaintiffs in the following four actions: Lazaroff v. The Coca-Cola 

Company, et al., 14-cv-3686, Sowizrol v. The Coca-Cola Company, et al., 14-cv-3774, Rankin v. 

The Coca-Cola Company, et. al., 14-cv-4274, and Marino v. The Coca-Cola Company, et al., 14-

cv-4356. 

The Court has considered the parties’ papers, including the supplemental briefs ordered by 

the Court, relevant legal authority, and the record in this case. The Court finds the motion suitable 

for disposition without oral argument, and it VACATES the hearing scheduled for October 2, 

2015. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). 

The Moving Plaintiffs ask the Court to consolidate the four cases listed above for all 

 

1

 The Court issues this amended order to correct a typographical error at line 15, relating to 

the citation to Nobles v. the Coca-Cola Company, et al. In the original order, the Court incorrectly 

listed the case number as 13-cv-5071. This Amended Order contains the correct case number. 

Case 4:14-md-02555-JSW Document 99 Filed 09/30/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

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 

pur

the

to t

exp

sup

con

Pla

and

Th

sha

not

Co

Pla

mo

Da

rposes, inclu

ey oppose co

the transfero

pressed an in

pplemental b

nsolidated fo

aintiffs make

d Defendant

Accord

e Moving Pl

all enter Def

thing in that 

urt’s Order, 

In their

aintiffs corre

otion to dism

IT IS S

ated: Septem

uding trial. T

onsolidation 

or districts at

ntention to c

brief was inte

or pre-trial p

e clear that th

s also ask th

dingly, each o

laintiffs’ cas

fendants’ pro

Order shall 

dated July 2

r opposition b

ectly note tha

miss. 

SO ORDER

mber 29, 2015

That request 

“for all purp

t the conclus

onsolidate a

ended only t

proceedings,

hey do not o

hat the Court

of these eigh

ses shall be c

oposed order

alter any pri

22, 2015, set

brief, Defen

at this is an i

RED. 

5

2

is GRANTE

poses,” becau

sion of pre-tr

all eight actio

to seek clarif

as set forth 

oppose conso

 consolidate

ht actions sh

consolidated

r on Pretrial 

ior order of t

tting forth th

ndants sugge

issue that sho

ED. The No

use they inte

rial proceedi

ons for all pu

fication as to

in the Minu

olidating the

e these matte

hall be conso

d for pre-trial

Practice and

the Court, in

he authority a

st the Nobles

ould be addr

__

JE

Un

on-Moving P

end to move

ings. This C

urposes, and

o why all eig

ute Order. In

ese matters fo

ers for pre-tri

olidated for p

l proceeding

d Procedure,

ncluding, but

and duty of l

s case shoul

ressed by wa

___________

EFFREY S. W

nited States D

Plaintiffs hav

 to remand t

Court has nev

d the Order re

ght matters s

n their reply 

or pre-trial p

ial proceedin

pre-trial proc

gs and trial. 

 with the cav

t not limited

lead counsel

ld be dismiss

ay of a prope

__________

WHITE 

District Judg

ve stated tha

their lawsuit

ver 

equiring 

should not be

brief, all 

proceedings, 

ngs. 

ceedings. 

The Court 

veat that 

d to the 

l. 

sed. 

erly noticed 

____ 

ge 

t

s

e

Case 4:14-md-02555-JSW Document 99 Filed 09/30/15 Page 2 of 2