Rhodes

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DONALD E. HOLLINS, No. 1:20-cv-00692-DAD-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, v. ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES D. RHODES, et al., Defendants.

DONALD E. HOLLINS,

No. 1:20-cv-00775-NONE-BAM (PC) Plaintiff, 18 v.

D. RHODES, et al.,

20 Defendants.

22 Plaintiff Donald E. Hollins is proceeding pro se in the above-captioned actions, alleging that defendants deprived him of his civil rights. Pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[i]f actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may: (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions; (2) consolidate the actions; or (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay.” In exercising its discretion, the court “weighs the saving of wOoe 4: UV OOM AE SMO tere OY ee

time and effort consolidation would produce against any inconvenience, delay, or…