Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00267/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00267-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Roger Lee Bates
Plaintiff
Union Pacific Railroad Company
Defendant

Document Text:

1

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ROGER LEE BATES, 

 CIV. NO. S-06-00267-LKK-EFB 

 Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY 

and DOES 1 through 20, 

inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

 / 

PAUL J. HALL, CIV. NO. S-03-2032-RRB-JFM 

 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY 

and DOES 1 through 10, 

inclusive, 

 

 Defendants. 

 / 

Before the court is Defendant Union Pacific Railroad 

Company’s (“Union Pacific”) notice of related actions. Union 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:06-cv-00267-LKK -EFB Document 93 Filed 11/09/07 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

Pacific states in the notice of related actions that it has 

filed substantially similar motions in limine raising Daubert 

challenges to certain evidence in both of the above-entitled 

actions. Union Pacific further states that “although some 

significant time savings would occur by having one court hear 

the related evidentiary matters . . . the time savings may not 

justify relating the actions as the actions are not otherwise 

related and have substantially more issues that are not 

related.” 

After examining the above-entitled actions, the court 

concludes that the common evidentiary issues are not sufficient 

to establish relatedness of the actions within the meaning of 

Local Rule 83-123 (E.D. Cal. 2005). Therefore, the assignment 

of the matters to the same judge is not likely to effect a 

substantial savings of judicial effort. 

Accordingly, because it is inappropriate to relate or 

reassign the actions, the court declines to do so. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: November 6, 2007 

 

 /s/ Ralph R. Beistline______ 

 RALPH R. BEISTLINE 

United States District Judge 

 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 2:06-cv-00267-LKK -EFB Document 93 Filed 11/09/07 Page 2 of 2