In Re: Hologenix, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedDecember 20, 2022
Docket2:22-cv-07510
StatusUnknown

This text of In Re: Hologenix, LLC (In Re: Hologenix, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re: Hologenix, LLC, (C.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-07510-FMO Document 13 Filed 12/20/22 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:627 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 22-7510 FMO Date December 20, 2022 Title In re Hologenix, LLC (BK Case No. 20-13849 BR)

Present: The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge Gabriela Garcia None None Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorney Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Re: Consolidation of Actions In three related appeals1 arising from debtor Hologenix, LLC’s (“appellee”) Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition (Bankruptcy (“BK”) Case No. 20-13849 BR), Multiple Energy Technologies, LLC (“appellant”) challenges the Bankruptcy Court’s orders confirming appellee’s Chapter 11 plan, (see Hologenix II, Dkt. 1, Notice of Appeal at 2), authorizing assumption of the executory employment contract of Seth Casden (Hologenix III, Dkt. 1, Notice of Appeal at 2), and denying appellant’s Motion to Dismiss Debtor Hologenix, LLC’s Bankruptcy Case. (See Hologenix IV, Dkt. 1, Notice of Appeal at 2). “If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may . . . consolidate the actions[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(2).2 The court “weighs the saving of time and effort consolidation would produce against any inconvenience, delay, or expense that it would cause.” Huene v. United States, 743 F.2d 703, 704 (9th Cir.), on reh’g, 753 F.2d 1081 (9th Cir. 1984). “A district court generally has ‘broad’ discretion to consolidate actions[.]” Pierce v. Cty. of Orange, 526 F.3d 1190, 1203 (9th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, no later than December 28, 2022, the parties shall file either a stipulation or response, not to exceed five pages, to the Order to Show Cause why the Hologenix II, Hologenix III, and Hologenix IV actions should not be consolidated. 00 : 00 Initials of Preparer gga 1 The three related appeals are In re Hologenix, LLC, CV 22-7510 (C.D. Cal.) (“Hologenix II”), In re Hologenix, LLC, CV 22-7521 (C.D. Cal.) (“Hologenix III”), and In re Hologenix, LLC, CV 22-7522 (C.D. Cal.) (“Hologenix IV”), each of which were filed on October 14, 2022. The court previously vacated and remanded the Bankruptcy Court’s orders in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding in related case In re Hologenix, LLC, CV 20-10109 FMO (C.D. Cal.) (“Hologenix I”). 2 For example, in its Confirmation Order, the Bankruptcy Court considered and referred to the briefing for appellant’s Motion to Dismiss Debtor Hologenix, LLC’s Bankruptcy Case. (See BK Dkt. 763, Confirmation Order at 5-6). CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re: Hologenix, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hologenix-llc-cacd-2022.