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

Law Offices 

COTCHETT, PITRE &

MCCARTHY, LLP 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION OF CITY OF RICHMOND TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES 

SHOULD BE RELATED AND NOTICE OF RELATED CASES; Case No. 3:17-cv-00485WHO 

JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (SBN 36324) 

jcotchett@cpmlegal.com 

NANCY L. FINEMAN (SBN 124870) 

nfineman@cpmlegal.com 

ALEXANDRA P. SUMMER (SBN 266485) 

asummer@cpmlegal.com 

CAMILO ARTIGA-PURCELL (SBN 273229) 

cartigapurcell@cpmlegal.com 

COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP

San Francisco Airport Office Center 

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Telephone: (650) 697-6000 

Facsimile: (650) 697-0577 

BRUCE REED GOODMILLER (SBN 121491) 

Bruce_goodmiller@ci.richmond.ca.us 

RACHEL H. SOMMOVILLA, (SBN 231529) 

rachel_sommovilla@ci.richmond.ca.us 

CITY OF RICHMOND 

450 Civic Center Plaza 

P.O. Box 4046 

Richmond, CA 94804 

Telephone: (510) 620-6509 

Facsimile: (510) 620-6518 

Attorneys for Non-Party City of Richmond 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the 

United States, UNITED STATES OF 

AMERICA, JOHN F. KELLY, Secretary 

of the United States Department of 

Homeland Security, DANA J. BOENTE, 

Acting Attorney General of the United 

States, 

Defendants.

Case No. 3:17-cv-00485-WHO

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION OF CITY 

OF RICHMOND TO CONSIDER 

WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE 

RELATED PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 

3-12(B) and NOTICE OF RELATED 

CASE PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL 

RULE 3-13 

Complaint Filed: January 31, 2017 

No Trial Date 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 43 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 3
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

Law Offices 

COTCHETT, PITRE &

MCCARTHY, LLP 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION OF CITY OF RICHMOND TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES 

SHOULD BE RELATED AND NOTICE OF RELATED CASES; Case No. 3:17-cv-00485WHO 

 1 

I. INTRODUCTION 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12(b), Plaintiff City of Richmond (“Richmond”) in the City 

of Richmond v. Trump, et al. Case No. 3:17-cv-01535-SK filed March 21, 2017 in this Court (“the 

Richmond Action”), a non-party in this action, respectfully requests that the Court consider 

whether the actions, City of County of San Francisco v. Trump et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-00485-

WHO (“San Francisco Action”) and the Richmond Action, may be related. On February 10, 

2017, this Court related the San Francisco Action to County of Santa Clara v. Trump et al., Case 

No. 3:17-cv-00574-WHO (“Santa Clara Action). A copy of the complaints are attached as 

Exhibit 1 (Richmond Action), Exhibit 2 (San Francisco Action), and Exhibit 3 (Santa Clara 

Action) to the Declaration of Nancy L. Fineman. 

Richmond also gives notice pursuant to Civ. L.R. 3-13 that the Richmond Action is related 

to the San Francisco and Santa Clara actions. 

II. ARGUMENT 

“An action is related to another action if: (1) the actions concern substantially the same 

parties, property, transaction or event; and (2) it appears likely 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). 

The Richmond, San Francisco, and Santa Clara Actions concern substantially the same 

parties and events. Each Action challenges the constitutionality of Executive Order 13768 issued 

by defendant Donald J. Trump on January 25, 2017. The three actions make similar 

constitutional arguments, i.e., that the Executive Order violates the Tenth Amendment and the 

Separation of Powers clause. Each action sues the President, Attorney General, Secretary of 

Homeland Security, and the United States of America. Relating the Richmond Action to the San 

Francisco and Santa Clara Actions will prevent unduly burdensome duplication of labor and 

expense and/or conflicting results. 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 43 Filed 03/23/17 Page 2 of 3
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

Law Offices 

COTCHETT, PITRE &

MCCARTHY, LLP 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION OF CITY OF RICHMOND TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES 

SHOULD BE RELATED AND NOTICE OF RELATED CASES; Case No. 3:17-cv-00485WHO 

 2 

III. CONCLUSION 

For the reasons set forth above, Richmond respectfully requests that the Court relate the 

Richmond Action to the San Francisco and Santa Clara Actions. 

Dated: March 23, 2017 COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP

 By: /s/ Nancy L. Fineman 

 

 NANCY L. FINEMAN 

 Attorneys for Non-Party 

 City of Richmond

Dated: March 23, 2017 CITY OF RICHMOND 

 By: /s/ Bruce Reed Goodmiller 

 

BRUCE REED GOODMILLER 

 Attorneys for Non-Party 

 City of Richmond 

ATTESTATION OF FILING

 I, Nancy L. Fineman, hereby attest, pursuant to Northern District of California, Local Rule 

5-1(i)(3) that concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory 

hereto. 

 /s/ Nancy L. Fineman 

 NANCY L. FINEMAN 

 Attorney for Non-Party 

 City of Richmond

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 43 Filed 03/23/17 Page 3 of 3