Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00592/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00592-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, No. 06-cv-0559-MCE-KJM 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY, CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY

OVERSIGHT BOARD,

Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

ARIZONA ELECTRIC POWER

COOPERATIVE; CITY OF ANAHEIM;

CITY OF AZUSA; CITY OF BANNING;

CITY OF BURBANK; CITY OF

GLENDALE; CITY OF LOS ANGELES;

CITY OF PASADENA; CITY OF

RIVERSIDE; CITY OF SANTA CLARA;

CITY OF SEATTLE; CITY OF VERNON;

EUGENE WATER AND ELECTRIC BOARD;

LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER

AND POWER; MODESTO IRRIGATION

DISTRICT; NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

POWER AGENCY; PUBLIC UTILITY

DISTRICT NO. 2 OF GRANT COUNTY;

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

DISTRICT; SALT RIVER PROJECT

AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENT AND

POWER DISTRICT; and

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT,

Defendants.

///

///

Case 2:06-cv-00592-MCE -KJM Document 120 Filed 06/02/06 Page 1 of 3
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

SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY, No. 2:06-cv-0592-MCE-KJM

a California corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

ARIZONA ELECTRIC POWER

COOPERATIVE; CITY OF ANAHEIM,

CALIFORNIA; CITY OF AZUSA;

CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF BURBANK, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF PASADENA, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA;

CITY OF SEATTLE, WASHINGTON;

CITY OF VERNON, CALIFORNIA;

EUGENE WATER AND ELECTRIC BOARD;

LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER

AND POWER; MODESTO IRRIGATION

DISTRICT; NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

POWER AGENCY; PUBLIC UTILITY

DISTRICT NO. 2 OF GRANT COUNTY;

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

DISTRICT; SALT RIVER PROJECT

AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENT AND

POWER DISTRICT; and

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

Plaintiffs in these related cases have filed an Ex Parte

Application requesting that the Court reschedule the hearing on

identical motions, filed in both cases, by Defendant Public

Utility District No. 2 of Grant County (“Defendant Grant”) to

dismiss, transfer, or, in the alternative, to stay the instant

proceedings as against Defendant Grant. 

///

///

///

Case 2:06-cv-00592-MCE -KJM Document 120 Filed 06/02/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Having assessed the constraints of its own schedule, and

following review of said Ex Parte Application as well as

Defendant Grant’s Opposition thereto, the Court finds that

interests of judicial economy mandate that all preliminary

motions in this matter, including the motions that are the

subject of the application now before the Court, be heard

simultaneously on August 21, 2006. Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte

Application is accordingly GRANTED. The hearings on Defendant

Grant’s Motions to Dismiss, Transfer, or, in the Alternative,

Stay Proceedings are hereby continued to August 21, 2006 in both

of these related cases. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 1, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00592-MCE -KJM Document 120 Filed 06/02/06 Page 3 of 3