Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00941/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00941-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON VISION CARE 

INC,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-00941-HSG 

ORDER RELATING CASES

Re: Dkt. Nos. 44, 48, 50, 51

Before the Court are four administrative motions to consider whether eight cases filed in 

this district are related to the above-captioned matter. 

The Court finds that the actions “concern substantially the same parties, property, 

transaction, or event,” and that “[i]t 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.” Civ. L.R. 3-12(a). Accordingly, the Court determines that the following cases are 

related to 3:15-cv-00941-HSG and reassigns them to the undersigned for all future proceedings:

 3:15-cv-01212-MEJ

 3:15-cv-01276-MEJ

 3:15-cv-01281-MEJ

 3:15-cv-01297-EDL

 3:15-cv-01340-EDL

 3:15-cv-01406-JSC

The Court also determines that Case Nos. 3:15-cv-01301-HSG and 3:15-cv-01408-HSG 

are related to 3:15-cv-00941-HSG.

The parties are instructed that any future filings in the reassigned cases are to bear the 

Case 4:15-cv-00941-HSG Document 54 Filed 04/01/15 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

Northern District of California

initials of the undersigned immediately after the case number. The case management conferences 

in the reassigned cases will be rescheduled by the Court. The parties shall adjust the dates for the 

conference, disclosures and report required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16 and 26 

accordingly. Unless otherwise ordered, any noticed dates for motion hearings are vacated and 

must be re-noticed by the moving party before the undersigned. Any deadlines set by the ADR 

Local Rules remain in effect. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 1, 2015

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:15-cv-00941-HSG Document 54 Filed 04/01/15 Page 2 of 2