(PC) Steward v. Pfeiffer ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DONNY STEWARD, Case No. 1:22-cv-00746-HBK (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 13 v. (Doc. No. 12-1) 14 C. PFEIFFER, ET AL., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Judicial Notice, contained within 18 Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s construed motion to remand. (Doc. No. 12-1). Defendant 19 requests the Court to take judicial notice of the following pleadings and orders from Steward v. 20 Pfeiffer, Kern County Superior Court Case No. BCV-20-102663, and Steward v. Pfeiffer, et al., 21 No. 1:19-cv-001022-DAD-EPG (E.D. Cal.). 22 1. Complaint filed in Kern County Superior Court No. BCV-20-102663; 23 2. Order sustaining demurrer with leave to amend in Kern County Superior Court Case No. BCV-20-102663; 24 3. Order denying Defendants’ motion to dismiss in Kern County Superior Court Case No. BCV-20-102663; 25 4. Notice of motion and amended complaint filed in Kern County Superior Court Case No. BCV-20-102663; 26 5. Electronic docket for Kern County Superior Court Case No. BCV-20-102663; 27 6. Notice to adverse party of removal to federal court filed in Kern County Superior Court Case No. BCV-20-102663; 28 1 7. Minutes concerning June 22, 2022 case management conference in Kern County > Superior Court Case No. BCV-20- 102663; 8. Complaint filed in Steward v. Pfeiffer, et al., No. 1:19-cv-001022-DAD-EPG (E.D. 9. Electronic docket in Steward v. Pfeiffer, et al., No. 1:19-cv-001022-DAD-EPG (E.D. 4 Cal.). 5 | (oc. No. 12-1 at 1-2) 6 Under Federal Rule of Evidence 201(b)(2), “[t]he court may judicially notice a fact that is 7 || not subject to reasonable dispute because it . . . can be accurately and readily determined from g || sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Courts judicially notice other court 9 | proceedings “if those proceedings have a direct relation to the matters at issue.” United States ex. 10 | Rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens Counsel v. Borneo, Inc., 971 F.2d 244, 248 (9th Cir. 1992) 11 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); Trigueros v. Adams, 658 F.3d 983, 987 (9th Cir. 12 | 2011). However, a court may not take judicial notice of findings of facts from another case. 13 | Walker v. Woodford, 454 F. Supp. 2d 1007, 1022 (S.D. Cal. 2006). 14 Here, Defendants request that the Court take judicial notice of Plaintiff’s filings from his 15 || State court case and his other federal case, all which have a direct relation to the current action in 16 | the Eastern District of California because they involved the same facts, claims, and parties. The 17 | pleadings and orders in the two matters are readily available to the court through the PACER 18 || database and the Kern County Superior Court Portal, both sources of information whose accuracy 19 || cannot reasonably be questioned. Accordingly, the court will grant Defendant’s request to take 20 || judicial notice of the pleadings and orders in Steward v. Pfeiffer, Kern County Superior Court 91 | Case No. BCV-20-102663, and Steward v. Pfeiffer, et al., No. 1:19-cv-001022-DAD-EPG (E.D. 29 || Cal.). However, the Court’s judicial notice of the filings in these cases does not constitute an 23 || endorsement or application of the findings in either case to the instant matter. 24 ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED: 5 Defendants’ Motion for Judicial Notice (Doc. No. 12-1) is GRANTED. 26 | Dated: _ May 24, 2023 Mihna Th hareh fackte 07 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28