Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05118/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05118-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

 (Compare Complaint, C 09-04203-JW Docket Item No. 1 with Joint Case Management

Conference Statement, C 09-05118-VRW Docket Item No. 12.) The Court looks to the Joint

Statement in case C 09-05118-VRW to discern the facts of that case because Plaintiff failed to

electronically file its Complaint. (See Clerk’s Notice Re: Failure to File Electronically and/or

Register as an E-Filer, C 09-05118-VRW Docket Item 11.) 

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

J & J Sports Productions, Inc.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

Esmeralda Arrizon, et al.,

Defendants. /

NO. CV 09-04203 JW 

NO. CV 09-05118 VRW

ORDER FINDING CASES NOT RELATED

Presently before the Court is Chief Judge Walker’s February 3, 2010 Order. (hereafter

“February 3, 2010 Order,” C 09-05118-VRW Docket Item No. 4.) Chief Judge Walker referred J &

J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Arrizon, et al., C 09-05118-VRW (“Second Action”) to the Court for

the purpose of determining whether it relates to J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Arrizon, et al., C

09-04203-JW (“First Action”).

Civil Local Rule 3-12(a) provides: 

An action is related to another when: 

(1) The actions concern substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event; and 

(2) It 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.

Here, the Court finds that although the cases have identical parties, they involve different

events.1 The Complaint in the First Action alleges that on September 13, 2008, Defendants

Case 3:09-cv-05118-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/19/10 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

exhibited without authorization “The Challenge”: Joel Casamayor v. Juan Manuel Marquez, Ring

Magazine World Lightweight Championship Fight Program. (C 09-04203-JW Complaint ¶ 12.) In

contrast, the Second Action is based on allegations that on November 1, 2008, Defendants exhibited

without authorization Latin Fury: “Final Impact,” Julio Cesar Chavez, Jr. v. Matt Vanda, IBO/IBF

Flyweight Championship Fight. (See C 09-05118-VRW Joint Statement at 2.) These allegations

show that although both cases involve alleged violations of Plaintiff’s commercial distribution

rights, the violations involved two separate fights occurring on two separate dates. Thus, the Court

finds that there is no risk of “unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting

results if the cases are conducted before different Judges.”

Accordingly, the Court finds that J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Arrizon, et al., C 09-

04203-JW, and J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Arrizon, et al., C 09-05118-VRW, are not related.

Dated: February 19, 2010 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-05118-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/19/10 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

Thomas Peter Riley tprlaw@att.net 

Bruce Charles Piontkowski bpiontkowski@tingleyllp.com 

Dated: February 19, 2010 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: /s/ JW Chambers 

Elizabeth Garcia

Courtroom Deputy

Case 3:09-cv-05118-WHA Document 14 Filed 02/19/10 Page 3 of 3