Abittan v. Chao
- Nathanael Cousins
- 5:20-cv-09340
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Abittan v. Chao, Judge Cousins ordered responses on whether the case may proceed before him without nominal defendant Eian Labs’ consent.
The parties to the case, particularly nominal defendant Eian Labs, Inc., whose lack of consent raised the jurisdiction issue; the pending motions to dismiss were not decided.
What happened
In Abittan v. Chao, two groups of defendants had asked the court to dismiss the case. The court said it could rule on those motions only if all parties consented to the magistrate judge’s authority.
Nominal defendant Eian Labs, Inc. had not consented. The court therefore asked the parties to explain within seven days whether it could continue without Eian Labs’ consent, or to obtain Eian Labs’ consent or refusal to consent. The order did not decide the dismissal motions.
Judge Nathanael M. Cousins issued the order to show cause on June 11, 2021, and required responses by June 18, 2021.
The detailed version
- Abittan v. Chao · No. 5:20-cv-09340
- Nathanael Cousins
- June 11, 2021
Background
Ariel Abittan sued Lily Chao and others. Eian Labs, Inc. was named as a nominal defendant. The opinion states that Temujin Labs Inc. (Delaware) filed one motion to dismiss, and Temujin Labs Inc. (Cayman) and two individual defendants filed another motion to dismiss.
Jurisdictional issue
Judge Cousins is a magistrate judge. Under the rule cited in the order, a magistrate judge generally needs the consent of all parties before deciding the case. Eian Labs had not consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. Without that consent, the case might have to be reassigned to a district judge.
Order
The court issued an order to show cause, asking the parties to respond within seven days—by June 18, 2021—on whether the court could proceed without consent from the nominal defendant. The parties could instead obtain Eian Labs’ consent or refusal to consent. The court did not rule on either pending motion to dismiss.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.