USA v. Stanfield et al

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
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MARCUS GIPSON and
BOBBY LEE STANFIELD,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 2:26-cr-00186-JAM
RELATED CASE ORDER
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
BOBBY LEE STANFIELD and
RONEEL PRASAD,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 2:26-cr-00187-DJC
Examination 	of 	the 	above-entitled 	actions 	reveals 	that 	these
actions are related within the meaning of Local Rule 123 (E.D. Cal.
2026). 	Accordingly, 	the 	assignment 	of 	the 	matters 	to 	the 	same
judge 	is 	likely 	to 	affect 	a 	substantial 	savings 	of 	judicial 	effort
and is also likely to be convenient for the parties.
Case 2:26-cr-00187-JAM Document 27 Filed 10/14/26 Page 1 of 2

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
2
The 	parties 	should 	be 	aware 	that 	relating 	the 	cases 	under
Local 	Rule 	123 	merely 	has 	the 	result 	that 	these 	actions 	are
assigned 	to 	the 	same 	judge; 	no 	consolidation 	of 	the 	actions 	is
effected.
IT 	IS 	THEREFORE 	ORDERED 	that 	the 	action 	denominated 	2:26-cr-
00187-DJC 	be 	reassigned 	to 	Senior 	Judge 	John 	A. 	Mendez 	for 	all
further proceedings, and any dates currently set in this reassigned
case only are hereby VACATED. 	Henceforth, the caption on documents
filed in the reassigned cases shall be shown as 2:26-cr-00187-JAM.
IT 	IS 	FURTHER 	ORDERED 	that 	the 	Clerk 	of 	the 	Court 	make
appropriate 	adjustment 	in 	the 	assignment 	of 	criminal 	cases 	to
compensate for this reassignment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 13, 2026
Case 2:26-cr-00187-JAM Document 27 Filed 10/14/26 Page 2 of 2