Levitte v. Google Inc.

Filing 9

MOTION to Relate C08-3452 RMW, C08-3888 SI Case to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related to C08-3369 JW Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12 filed by Hal K. Levitte. (Jonckheer, Willem) (Filed on 9/3/2008) Modified on 9/3/2008 (cv, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
Levitte v. Google Inc. Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S C H U B E R T JONCKHEER KOLBE & KRALOWEC LLP 8 9 10 Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 788-4220 ROBERT C. SCHUBERT S.B.N. 62684 WILLEM F. JONCKHEER S.B.N. 178748 KIMBERLY A. KRALOWEC S.B.N. 163158 SCHUBERT JONCKHEER KOLBE & KRALOWEC LLP Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 788-4220 Facsimile: (415) 788-0161 Attorneys for Plaintiff Hal K. Levitte UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TO THE CLERK AND ALL PARTIES OF RECORD AND THEIR COUNSEL HEREIN: Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12, Hal K. Levitte, plaintiff in the action Levitte v. Google, Inc., Case No. C08-03369 ("Levitte"), files this administrative motion requesting the Court to consider whether the subsequently filed class actions captioned RK West, Inc. v. Google, Inc., Case No. C08-03452 ("RK West") (filed July 17, 2008) and Pulaski & Middleman, LLC v. Google Inc., Case No. C08-03888 ("Pulaski") (filed August 14, 2008) should be related to this action. Levitte, RK West, and Pulaski are all currently pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California before different judges. Specifically, Levitte is pending before Judge Ware, RK West is pending before Judge Whyte, and Pulaski is pending before Judge Illston. v. GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant. HAL K. LEVITTE, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, Case No. C08-03369 JW ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12 Judge: Hon. James Ware ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S C H U B E R T JONCKHEER KOLBE & KRALOWEC LLP 8 9 10 Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 788-4220 Plaintiff Levitte believes that RK West and Pulaski should be related to Levitte, the earliestfiled case, because the three cases concern substantially the same parties, property, transactions and events (see Civil L.R. 3-12(a)(1)). Plaintiffs in Levitte, RK West, and Pulaski all seek to represent a putative class consisting of persons or entities located within the United States who contracted for and participated in Google's AdWords program. Google, Inc. ("Google") is the named defendant in all three actions. The transactions and events in all three actions involve Google's inclusion of lowquality parked domains and error pages websites within its AdWords advertising program. Levitte and Pulaski assert claims against Google for Google's inclusion of low-quality parked domain and error page websites within its AdWords advertising program. RK West asserts claims against Google only for Google's inclusion of low-quality parked domain websites within its AdWords advertising program. Levitte is the first-filed case in this district seeking relief based on the theory that Google's inclusion of low-quality parked domain and error page websites within its AdWords advertising program, and related charges, are unlawful. There will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense and potentially conflicting results if the cases remain before different judges (see Civil L.R. 3-12(a)(2)) because plaintiffs in Levitte, RK West, and Pulaski all represent identical putative classes against the same defendant, and all three actions allege nearly identical claims against Google, arising from Google's inclusion of low-quality parked domains and error pages websites within Google's AdWords advertising program. In fact, RK West has moved for an order seeking to relate Levitte, RK West, and Pulaski before this Court. See Docket Nos. 10-12, Case No. 08-03452, Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12, Declaration of Brian S. Kabateck in Support of Motion, and Proposed Order, filed August 29, 2008. Levitte's counsel is also advised that the Pulaski plaintiff has filed an administrative motion to have the Pulaski action related to Levitte and RK West, and requesting that Pulaski and RK West be reassigned to this Court. Furthermore, this Court has extensive knowledge of Google and Google's AdWords advertising program, based upon another case pending before this Court since 2005, namely CLRB Hanson Industries, LLC v. Google, Inc., Case No. C05-03649 JW ("CLRB"). As this Court is aware, CLRB alleges that Google's AdWords advertising program unlawfully overcharges advertisers in excess of advertisers' set "daily budgets" for their advertising campaigns. Finally, Levitte, RK West, and Pulaski are the only pending class actions within this district that concern Google's unlawful and improper inclusion of low-quality parked domain and error page websites within its AdWords advertising program. ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12 2 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S C H U B E R T JONCKHEER KOLBE & KRALOWEC LLP 8 9 10 Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 788-4220 Accordingly, plaintiff Levitte respectfully requests that this Court issue an order deeming RK West and Pulaski as related cases, so that the Clerk can reassign RK West and Pulaski to this Court, pursuant to Local Rule 3-12(f)(3). Dated: September 3, 2008 SCHUBERT JONCKHEER KOLBE & KRALOWEC LLP 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 /s/ ROBERT C. SCHUBERT WILLEM F. JONCKHEER KIMBERLY A. KRALOWEC Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 788-4220 Facsimile: (415) 788-0161 Attorneys for Plaintiff ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12 3