Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01961/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01961-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Counter Claimant
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
Counter 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

1

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FRU-CON CONSTRUCTION

CORPORATION, a Missouri

corporation,

Plaintiff,

v. CIV. NO. S-05-583 LKK/GGH

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

DISTRICT, a municipal utility

district; and UTILITY ENGINEERING

CORPORATION, a Texas corporation,

Defendants.

 /

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

DISTRICT, a municipal utility

district,

Plaintiff,

v. CIV. NO. S-05-617 LKK/GGH

FRU-CON CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION,

a corporation; A. TEICHERT & SON, 

INC., aka TEICHERT CONSTRUCTION,

a California corporation,

Defendants.

 /

////

Case 2:05-cv-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 1 of 9
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

TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY

COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Connecticut

corporation,

NO. CIV. S-05-1961 FCD/DAD

Plaintiff,

v. RELATED CASE ORDER

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

DISTRICT, a California

municipal utility district,

Defendant.

 /

Examination of the above-entitled actions reveals that 

the three (3) actions are related within the meaning of Local Rule

83-123(a) (E.D. Cal. 1997). The actions involve the same parties,

and are based on the same or similar claims.

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.

The parties should be aware that relating the cases under

Local Rule 83-123 merely has the result that the three (3) 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. 

////

////

Case 2:05-cv-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 2 of 9
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

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the action denominated CIV. NO.

S-05-1961 FCD/DAD be, and the same hereby is, 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 case

shall be shown as CIV. NO. S-05-1961 LKK/GGH. 

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: November 2, 2005.

 

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:05-cv-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 3 of 9
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

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 is SET for

December 19, 2005 at 2:00 p.m. before Judge Karlton in

Chambers.

////

////

////

Case 2:05-cv-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 4 of 9
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

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-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 5 of 9
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

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-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 6 of 9
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

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-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 7 of 9
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

(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-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 8 of 9
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

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: November 2, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:05-cv-01961-LKK-GGH Document 13 Filed 11/02/05 Page 9 of 9