Motion to Consolidate Related Cases — OTO Analytics v. Benworth

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · No. 4:24-cv-03975-AMO · Doc. 50 · 2024-08-29 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
CASE No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO 
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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 
 
 
 
 
WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 
Alexander L. Cheney (SBN 302157) 
acheney@willkie.com 
333 Bush Street 
San Francisco, CA 94104 
(415) 858-7400 
 
Stuart R. Lombardi (admitted pro hac vice) 
slombardi@willkie.com 
787 7th Avenue 
New York, NY 10019 
(212) 728-8000 
 
Joshua S. Levy (admitted pro hac vice) 
jlevy@willkie.com 
1875 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, DC 20006-1238 
(202) 303-1000 
 
Attorneys for Petitioner 
Oto Analytics, LLC 
OTO ANALYTICS, LLC, 
Petitioner, 
v. 
BENWORTH CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC, 
Respondent. 
 Case No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO 
 
 
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO 
CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
 
Hearing 
Date:              January 9, 2025 
Time:             2:00 p.m. 
Courtroom:    10, 19th Floor 
Judge:            Hon. Araceli Martínez-Olguín 
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 50     Filed 08/29/24     Page 1 of 5

 
- 1 - 
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
CASE No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO 
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
NOTICE OF MOTION 
TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Petitioner Oto Analytics, LLC (f/k/a Oto Analytics, Inc., 
d/b/a Womply) (“Womply”) will and hereby moves this Court for an order consolidating Oto 
Analytics, LLC v. Benworth Capital Partners LLC, Civil No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO (N.D. Cal.) 
(the “Confirmation Action”), and Benworth Capital Partners LLC v. Oto Analytics, LLC, Civil 
No. 3:24-cv-4840-AMO (N.D. Cal.) (the “Vacatur Action”).  Womply will and hereby does 
notice this Motion for hearing on January 9, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as it may 
be heard), in Courtroom 10 of the Northern District of California, located at 450 Golden Gate 
Ave., San Francisco, CA 94102.  Womply does not believe a hearing is necessary because both 
parties have agreed to consolidate the above-referenced actions, but respectfully leaves that 
decision to this Court’s discretion.  
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a), Womply respectfully requests that this 
Court consolidate the Confirmation Action, which has been pending before this Court since 
July 1, 2024, and the Vacatur Action, which has been pending before this Court since August 7, 
2024, and was reassigned to Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín pursuant to her order dated 
August 15, 2024 (ECF No. 39).  These two cases involve the same parties, the same common 
facts, the same underlying arbitration, and this Court has already held that they are related.  
Accordingly, consolidation will promote just and efficient litigation in both Actions by 
streamlining scheduling, filings, and hearings and will also avoid the risk of inconsistent 
adjudication of the same issues raised during the course of the proceedings in both Actions.  
Benworth Capital Partners LLC (“Benworth”) has consented to consolidation. 
Womply’s Motion is based on this Notice of Motion, the accompanying Declaration of 
Alexander L. Cheney in support of the Motion and the exhibits thereto, and such other argument 
and evidence as may be presented at or prior to the hearing.   
 
 
 
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 50     Filed 08/29/24     Page 2 of 5

 
- 2 - 
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
CASE No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO 
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
Dated: August 29, 2024 
WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 
 
By: /s/ Alexander L. Cheney 
 
Alexander L. Cheney 
Stuart R. Lombardi 
Joshua S. Levy 
 
Attorneys for Petitioner 
Oto Analytics, LLC 
 
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 50     Filed 08/29/24     Page 3 of 5

 
 
 - 1 - 
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
CASE No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO 
 
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
MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
 
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a), Womply files this Motion to 
Consolidate Related Cases Oto Analytics, LLC v. Benworth Capital Partners LLC, Civil 
No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO (N.D. Cal.), and Benworth Capital Partners LLC v. Oto Analytics, 
LLC, Civil No. 3:24-cv-4840-AMO (N.D. Cal.) (together, the “Actions”). 
 
“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).  This Court may also “join for hearing 
or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions,” or “issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary 
cost or delay.”  Id.  “In determining whether or not to consolidate cases, the Court should weigh 
the interest of judicial convenience against the potential for delay, confusion and prejudice.”  
Bodri v. Gopro, Inc., 2016 WL 1718217, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2016) (quoting Zhu v. UCBH 
Holdings, Inc., 682 F. Supp. 2d 1049, 1052 (N.D. Cal. 2010)).  District Courts have “broad 
discretion in determining whether consolidation is appropriate, [and] typically, consolidation is 
favored.”  Ho Keung Tse v. Apple, Inc., 2013 WL 451639, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2013).  
 
The Actions easily satisfy the requirements of Rule 42(a) and should be consolidated.  
The Confirmation Action seeks to confirm an arbitration award between Womply and Benworth, 
which Benworth opposes, and the Vacatur Action seeks to vacate the same arbitration award, 
which Womply opposes.  Under the Federal Arbitration Act, the grounds on which a party can 
oppose confirmation of an arbitration award are the same grounds on which it can move to vacate 
an arbitration award.  See 9 U.S.C. §§ 9–10.  Thus, the Actions raise the same questions of law 
and fact between the same parties regarding the same arbitration award.  For these reasons, this 
Court has already held that the Actions are related.  (ECF No. 39.)  For the same reasons, it should 
also consolidate the Actions, which will promote judicial economy by permitting a single order 
addressing both confirmation and vacatur and will avoid the delay and inefficiency resulting from 
two separate actions about the same issues.  See Hernandez v. Smart & Final., 2010 WL 2505683, 
at *2 (S.D. Cal. June 17, 2010) (ordering the consolidation of the confirmation action and the 
vacatur action before granting the petition to confirm the arbitration award).  This will not result 
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 50     Filed 08/29/24     Page 4 of 5

 
 
 - 2 - 
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE RELATED CASES 
CASE No. 3:24-cv-03975-AMO 
 
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
in any prejudice because Benworth has consented to consolidation.  (Declaration of Alexander 
L. Cheney ¶ 4; id. at Exhibit 1.) 
For the foregoing reasons, this Court should consolidate the Confirmation Action and 
Vacatur Action. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dated: August 29, 2024 
WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 
 
By: /s/ Alexander L. Cheney 
 
Alexander L. Cheney 
Stuart R. Lombardi 
Joshua S. Levy 
 
Attorneys for Petitioner 
Oto Analytics, LLC
Case 4:24-cv-03975-AMO     Document 50     Filed 08/29/24     Page 5 of 5

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.cand.431982.50.0.pdf

Size

315,569 bytes

SHA-256

0eb1543b476837ab0f8f120af47bb09b81e635ea93c361a9b0848fb5adf28ed0

Our copy

gov.uscourts.cand.431982.50.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)