Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-05445/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-05445-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Selection Management Systems, Inc.
Plaintiff
Selection.com
Plaintiff
Torus Specialty Insurance Company
Defendant

Document Text:

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

JOHN DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

SELECTION.COM,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-02338-WHO 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

RELATE CASES

Re: Dkt. No. 31

On December 28, 2015, defendant filed a motion to relate this case to an action that

defendant recently filed against its insurance carrier, Selection Management Systems, Inc. v. Torus 

Specialty Insurance Company, No. 15-cv-05445-YGR (N.D. Cal. filed November 25, 2015). Dkt. 

No. 31. Torus Specialty Insurance Company submitted an opposition to the motion on December 

30, 2015. Dkt. No. 32.

Under Civil Local Rule 3-12(a), “[a]n action is related to another when: (1) the actions 

concern substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event; and (2) it 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.” Civil L.R. 3-12(a). Having reviewed the parties’

submissions and the filings and orders in this action and in Torus, I find that the cases are not 

related. Defendant’s motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2016

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 4:15-cv-05445-YGR Document 14 Filed 01/04/16 Page 1 of 1