Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02378/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02378-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

---

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 

NUTRISHARE, INC., a California 

corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE 

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut 

Corporation, CIGNA HEALTH AND 

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a 

Connecticut Corporation, and 

DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, 

Defendants.

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. 2:13-CV-02378 JAM-AC 

RELATED CASE ORDER 

CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE 

INSURANCE COMPANY and CIGNA 

HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, 

CounterClaimants, 

v. 

NUTRISHARE, INC., 

 CounterDefendant.

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. 2:15-CV-00351 MCE-DAD 

Examination of the above-entitled actions reveals that these 

actions are related within the meaning of Local Rule 123 (E.D. Cal. 

2005). Accordingly, the assignment of the matters to the same 

Case 2:13-cv-02378-JAM-AC Document 55 Filed 02/20/15 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 

judge is likely to affect a substantial savings of judicial effort 

and is also likely to be convenient for the parties. 

Defendants/Counter-Claimants Connecticut General Life 

Insurance Company and Cigna Health and Life Insurance Company’s 

objection [52] is noted. However, Local Rule 123(a) does not 

require that actions arise out of the same transaction or 

occurrence to be related. Rather, Local Rule 123(a) provides that 

matters may be related if “both actions involve the same parties 

and are based on the same or a similar claim.” L.R. 123(a)(1) 

(emphasis added). Rule 123(a) also provides that matters may be 

related if “for any other reasons, it would entail substantial 

duplication of labor if the actions were heard by different Judges 

or Magistrate Judges.” L.R. 123(a)(4). For both of these reasons, 

the matters are related under Local Rule 123. 

 The parties should be aware that relating the cases under 

Local Rule 123 merely has the result that these actions are 

assigned to the same judge and magistrate judge; no consolidation 

of the actions is effected. Under the regular practice of this 

court, related cases are generally assigned to the judge and 

magistrate judge to whom the first filed action was assigned. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the action denominated 2:15-CV00351 MCE-DAD be reassigned to Judge John A. Mendez and Magistrate 

Judge Allison Claire for all further proceedings, and any dates 

currently set in this reassigned case only are hereby VACATED. 

Henceforth, the caption on documents filed in the reassigned cases 

shall be shown as 2:15-CV-00351 JAM-AC. 

/// 

/// 

Case 2:13-cv-02378-JAM-AC Document 55 Filed 02/20/15 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 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court make 

appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to 

compensate for this reassignment. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 19, 2015 

 /s/ John A. Mendez________________ 

 JOHN A. MENDEZ 

 United States District Court Judge 

Case 2:13-cv-02378-JAM-AC Document 55 Filed 02/20/15 Page 3 of 3