From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ioane v. Merlak

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 6, 2020
1:19-cv-01585-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. May. 6, 2020)

Opinion

1:19-cv-01585-GSA-PC

05-06-2020

MICHAEL S. IOANE, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN MERLAK, et al., Defendants.


ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES (ECF No. 6.)

I. BACKGROUND

Michael S. Ioane ("Plaintiff") is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens vs. Six Unknown Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on November 6, 2019. (ECF No. 1.)

On November 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for all of his related cases to be consolidated. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff refers specifically to three cases: 1:19-cv-00879-JLT; 1:19-cv-01251-JLT, and 1:19-cv-00846-JLT.

II. RELATED CASES

Under Local Rule 123(a), an action is related to another "when

(1) both actions involve the same parties and are based on the same or a similar claim;

(2) both actions involve the same property, transaction, or event;
(3) both actions involve similar questions of fact and the same question of law and their assignment to the same Judge or Magistrate Judge is likely to effect a substantial savings of judicial effort, either because the same result should follow in both actions or otherwise; or

(4) for any other reasons, it would entail substantial duplication of labor if the actions were heard by different Judges or Magistrate Judges.

III. DISCUSSION

This case 1:19-cv-1585-GSA-PC; Ioane v. Puentes, et al., is Plaintiff's only prisoner civil rights case presently pending at this court. The three cases referred to by Plaintiff -- 1:19-cv-00879-JLT; 1:19-cv-01251-JLT; and 1:19-cv-00846-JLT - are all closed habeas corpus cases that involved different claims, questions of fact, and questions of law than Plaintiff's present case. Plaintiff has not shown, and the court does not see, how his three closed habeas corpus cases are related to the present case under Local Rule 123(a), or how consolidating the cases would serve any judicial purpose. Therefore, Plaintiff's motion to consolidate cases shall be denied.

IV. CONCLUSION

Therefore, based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Plaintiff's motion to consolidate cases, filed on February 21, 2020, is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 6 , 2020

/s/ Gary S. Austin

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Ioane v. Merlak

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 6, 2020
1:19-cv-01585-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. May. 6, 2020)
Case details for

Ioane v. Merlak

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL S. IOANE, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN MERLAK, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: May 6, 2020

Citations

1:19-cv-01585-GSA-PC (E.D. Cal. May. 6, 2020)