Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01252/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01252-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

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

1

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TONY HARRIS AND BRENDA PICKERN,

Plaintiffs,

v. CIV. NO. S-05-1252 LKK/GGH

PETCO ANIMAL SUPPLIES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

TONY HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v. CIV. NO. S-05-1459 FCD/CMK

BED, BATH & BEYOND,

Defendant.

 /

TONY HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v. CIV. NO. S-05-1419 MCE/DAD

CIRCUIT CITY STORES WEST COAST,

Defendant.

 /

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 1 of 10
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

2

TONY HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v. CIV. NO. S-05-1472 GEB/CMK

HOMETOWN BUFFET, INC., RELATED CASE ORDER

Defendant.

 /

Pending before the court is a Notice of Related Cases and

defendant Pan Pacific Retail Properties' motion to consolidate the

above-captioned cases, which is currently scheduled to be heard on

the court's Law and Motion Calendar for October 24, 2005. In these

cases, plaintiffs have alleged violations of the American with

Disabilities Act and other state law claims against several

businesses in the "Chico Crossroads" shopping center. Although

there is some commonality and overlap between these lawsuits

because they all allege violations of the ADA with respect to

common areas and because these cases involve the same shopping

center which is owned by Pan Pacific, plaintiffs have also alleged

violations with respect to each of the various facilities involved.

The district court has broad discretion under Fed. R. Civ. P.

42 to consolidate cases pending in the same district. Investors

Research Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for Cent. Dist. of California, 877

F.2d 777, 777 (9th Cir. 1989). To determine whether to

consolidate, the court "weighs the interest of judicial convenience

against the potential for delay, confusion and prejudice."

Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Triple A Machine Shop, Inc., 720 F. Supp.

805, 807 (N.D. Cal. 1989). Having reviewed the parties' papers and

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 2 of 10
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

3

the pleadings filed herein, it is apparent that plaintiffs' request

for injunctive relief and damages against each business is

different and unrelated. Thus, consolidation of these matters

would potentially lead to further delay, confusion, and prejudice,

and, accordingly, the motion to consolidate is DENIED. 

However, examination of the above-entitled actions reveals

that the above-captioned actions are related within the meaning of

Local Rule 83-123(a) (E.D. Cal. 1997). The actions are based on

the same or similar claims, the same property, and similar

questions of fact and the same question of law. Accordingly, the

assignment of the matters to the same judge and magistrate judge

is likely to effect a substantial savings of judicial effort and

is also likely to be convenient for the parties.

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

actions denominated CIV. NO. S-05-1459 FCD/CMK, CIV. NO. S-05-1419

MCE/DAD and CIV. NO. S-05-1472 GEB/CMK be, and the same hereby are,

reassigned to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton and Magistrate Judge

Gregory G. Hollows for all further proceedings, and any dates

currently set in this reassigned case only are hereby VACATED. The

parties are referred to the attached Order Setting Status (Pretrial

Scheduling) Conference. Henceforth, the caption on documents filed

in the reassigned cases shall be shown as CIV. NO. S-05-1459

LKK/GGH, CIV. NO. S-05-1419 LKK/GGH and CIV. NO. S-05-1472 LKK/GGH,

respectively. 

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 3 of 10
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

4

IT IS ORDERED that the law and motion hearing scheduled for

October 24, 2005 in case number CIV. S-05-01252 LKK/GGH is VACATED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court make

appropriate adjustment in the assignment of civil cases to

compensate for this reassignment.

DATED: October 17, 2005.

 

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 4 of 10
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

5

STATSET.LKK (rev. 12/00)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

_________________________________,

NO. CIV. S-____________ LKK

Plaintiff(s),

v. ORDER SETTING STATUS

(PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

 CONFERENCE 

_________________________________,

Defendant(s).

 /

This action has been assigned to the Honorable LAWRENCE K.

KARLTON. Pursuant to the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 16, as amended December 1, 1993, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that:

1. A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference in the three

above-captioned related case is SET for December 19, 2005 at 11:00

a.m., before Judge Karlton in Courtroom No. 4. All counsel shall

appear in person.

////

////

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 5 of 10
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

6

2. In order to enable the court to comply with the 120-day

time limit specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b), plaintiff SHALL

COMPLETE SERVICE OF PROCESS ON ALL PARTIES WITHIN FORTY-FIVE (45)

DAYS OF THE DATE OF FILING THE COMPLAINT HEREIN.

3. Concurrently with the service of process, or as soon

thereafter as possible, plaintiff shall serve upon each of the

parties named in the complaint, and upon all parties subsequently

joined, a copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk a

certificate reflecting such service. Any party who impleads a

third-party defendant shall serve upon that party a copy of this

order, and shall file with the clerk a certificate reflecting such

service.

4. In the event that this action was reassigned to Judge

Karlton from another judge, plaintiff shall serve upon all parties

to this action a copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk

a certificate reflecting such service.

5. Any non-governmental corporate party to an action in this

court shall file a statement identifying all its parent

corporations and listing any publicly held company that owns 10%

or more of the party’s stock. Defendant shall file the statement

with its initial pleading filed in the court and plaintiff shall

file the statement not later than ten (10) days after filing the

complaint. The parties shall supplement the statement within a

reasonable time of any change in the information.

6. In the event this action was originally filed in a state

court and thereafter removed to this court, the removing party or

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 6 of 10
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

7

parties shall, immediately following such removal, serve upon each

of the other parties and upon all parties subsequently joined, a

copy of this order, and shall file with the clerk a certificate

reflecting such service.

7. All parties to the action shall appear at the Status

Conference through counsel (or in person, if acting without

counsel). UNLESS SPECIFICALLY DIRECTED OTHERWISE, COUNSEL LOCATED

OUTSIDE THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO MAY APPEAR BY TELEPHONE, PROVIDED

THAT:

(a) THE ACTION DOES NOT INVOLVE A LITIGANT APPEARING IN

PROPRIA PERSONA. IN SUCH CASES, ALL COUNSEL AND LITIGANTS MUST

PERSONALLY APPEAR; and

(b) COUNSEL STATE IN THEIR TIMELY-FILED STATUS REPORTS

AS REQUIRED BY THIS ORDER THEIR DESIRE TO SO APPEAR, AND THEREIN

PROVIDE THE TELEPHONE NUMBER THEY WILL BE CALLING FROM; and

(c) PLACE THE CALL TO CHAMBERS THEMSELVES BY CALLING

(916) 930-4130, AT EXACTLY THE TIME THE CONFERENCE IS SCHEDULED TO

BEGIN. IF MORE THAN ONE PARTY DESIRES TO APPEAR BY TELEPHONE,

COUNSEL MUST MAKE ARRANGEMENTS AMONG THEMSELVES TO SET UP THE

CONFERENCE CALL AT THE SCHEDULED TIME WITH ALL PARTICIPANTS ON THE

LINE BEFORE CALLING CHAMBERS. A FAILURE TO PLACE THE TELEPHONE

CALL AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME WILL BE TREATED AS A FAILURE TO APPEAR

AND MAY SUBJECT COUNSEL TO SANCTIONS.

8. The parties shall file with the court and serve upon all

other parties, not later than 4:30 p.m., ten (10) days preceding

the conference, a Status Report. ANY PARTY FAILING TO FILE A

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 7 of 10
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

8

TIMELY STATUS REPORT PURSUANT TO THIS ORDER MAY BE SUBJECTED TO

MONETARY SANCTIONS AND/OR THE DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT OR

STRIKING OF THE ANSWER. The Status Report shall briefly set out

the views of the party making the report on the following matters:

(a) Name(s) of the parties counsel represents;

(b) A brief summary of the facts alleged in each

complaint and a characterization of the legal theories under which

recovery is sought or liability denied. The characterization of

the legal theories does not require legal argument, but only a

description of the legal theory (or theories);

(c) Progress in the service of process;

(d) Possible joinder of additional parties;

(e) Any expected or desired amendment of pleadings;

(f) Specifying the statutory basis for jurisdiction and

venue;

(g) Anticipated motions and the scheduling thereof;

(h) Anticipated discovery and the scheduling thereof.

In this regard, the parties shall discuss whether deferral of

discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d) is appropriate, any

order affecting discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and 29-37

is desired, and whether a discovery conference under Fed. R. Civ.

P. 26(f) should be held;

(i) Future proceedings, including setting appropriate

cut-off dates for discovery, law and motion, and the scheduling of

the pretrial conference and trial;

////

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 8 of 10
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

9

(j) Appropriateness of special procedures such as

agreement to try the matter before a magistrate judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(c), or reference to a special master, or to the

Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, or application of the

Manual for Complex Litigation, binding arbitration in Superior

Court;

(k) Whether any of the parties has timely demanded a

trial by jury;

(l) Estimate of trial time;

(m) Modification of standard pretrial procedures

specified by the local rules due to the relative simplicity or

complexity of the action;

(n) Whether the case is related to any other case,

including any matters in bankruptcy;

(o) Whether counsel will stipulate to the trial judge

acting as settlement judge and waive any disqualification by virtue

thereof, or whether the parties prefer to have a settlement

conference before another judge;

(p) The report of the parties concerning use of the

Voluntary Dispute Resolution Program pursuant to Local Rule 16-271;

(q) Any other matters which may be conducive to the

just, efficient, and economical determination of the action.

Following the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference, the

court will issue a written order regarding the future course of

this litigation.

////

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 9 of 10
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

10

9. Requests for continuance of Status Conferences are not

favored and will not be granted in the absence of a true emergency

and, in any event, will not be entertained unless made in writing

at least THREE (3) DAYS prior to the scheduled conference.

10. At the time of filing a motion or an opposition thereto,

counsel are requested to deliver to the court a copy on a 31⁄2"

floppy disk compatible with WordPerfect 8.0 or e-mail a copy to the

Judge’s Assistant, Tim Hinkle, at thinkle@caed.uscourts.gov. 

11. Counsel are hereby reminded of their continuing duty to

immediately notify the Courtroom Deputy at (916) 930-4133 and the

Judge’s Chambers in writing, of any settlement or other disposition

(Local Rule 16-160).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 17, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:05-cv-01252-LKK -GGH Document 28 Filed 10/19/05 Page 10 of 10