Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-01811/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-01811-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 385
Nature of Suit: Property Damage - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Property Damage

---

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

BROAN-NUTONE, L.L.C.; et al.,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 12-cv-01811-SC

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

BIFURCATE

A jury trial is scheduled in this matter for May 11, 2015. On 

March 12, 2015, Defendants Broan-Nutone, LLC and A.O. Smith 

Corporation filed a motion to bifurcate the liability and damages 

phases of trial. ECF No. 102. The motion is fully briefed. See

ECF Nos. 106 ("Opp'n"), 107 ("Reply"). The Court discussed the 

motion briefly, but did not hear oral argument, at a hearing on 

April 3, 2015.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b) permits the Court to 

order separate trials "[f]or convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to 

expedite and economize." Both the Rule and the caselaw 

Case 3:12-cv-01811-SC Document 111 Filed 04/15/15 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

For the Northern District of California

interpreting it make clear that the decision whether or not to 

bifurcate a trial is committed to the discretion of the district 

court. See, e.g., Zivkovic v. S. California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 

1080, 1088 (9th Cir. 2002) ("Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure confers broad discretion upon the district court to 

bifurcate a trial . . . ."); Jinro Am. Inc. v. Secure Investments, 

Inc., 266 F.3d 993, 998 (9th Cir.) opinion amended on denial of 

reh'g, 272 F.3d 1289 (9th Cir. 2001) ("Under Rule 42(b), the 

district court has broad discretion to bifurcate a trial . . . ."); 

MySpace, Inc. v. Graphon Corp., 732 F. Supp. 2d 915, 917 (N.D. Cal. 

2010) ("Bifurcation should be ordered only when it will result in 

judicial economy and will not unduly prejudice any party. Whether 

and how to bifurcate trials is a matter left within the sound 

discretion of the district court.") (internal citation omitted).

The Court finds that bifurcation of the trial in this matter 

will only serve to delay and complicate the trying of this case, 

which is set for trial in about four weeks. Additionally, the 

Court finds that bifurcating the trial in this case will not 

"result in judicial economy." See MySpace, 732 F. Supp. 2d at 917. 

Accordingly, Defendants' motion to bifurcate the trial in this 

matter is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 15, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:12-cv-01811-SC Document 111 Filed 04/15/15 Page 2 of 2