Hepting et al v. AT&T Corp. et al

Filing 165

MOTION to Related Case ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED filed by Benson B. Roe. (Himmelstein, Barry) (Filed on 6/5/2006)

Hepting et al v. AT&T Corp. et al

Doc. 165

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

James M. Finberg (State Bar No. 114850) Barry R. Himmelstein (State Bar No. 157736) Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857) Eric B. Fastiff (State Bar No. 182260) LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 30th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (San Francisco Division)

TASH HEPTING, et al., , Plaintiffs, v. AT&T CORP., et al., Defendants.

Case No. C-06-0672-VRW ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

The Honorable Vaughn R. Walker THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
540902.1 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED CASE NO. C-06-0672-VRW

Roe, et al. v. AT&T Corp., et al., case no. C-06-03467 MMC

TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: Pursuant to Local Rule 3-12, plaintiffs Benson B. Roe and Paul Goltz respectfully submit this administrative motion to consider whether a case filed in this District, Roe, et al. v. AT&T Corp., et al., case no. C-06-03467-MMC (filed May 30, 2006) ("Roe"), should be related to another case filed in this District, Hepting, et al. v. AT&T Corp. et al., case no. C-06-0672VRW ("Hepting").

Dockets.Justia.com

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
540902.1

Pursuant to Local Rule 3-12(d)(2), plaintiffs state that Roe names the same defendants as named in Hepting (i.e., AT&T Corp. and AT&T Inc.) and that both Roe and Hepting allege that these defendants violated federal communications statutes and the California Unfair Competition Law by illegally providing the federal government with AT&T's customers' telecommunications records. (Roe names additional AT&T corporate entities.) Plaintiffs in Roe and Hepting raise causes of actions for violations of 28 U.S.C. § 2702, 47 U.S.C. § 605, and California Bus. & Prof. Code §§17200, et seq. (Hepting includes additional causes of action that Roe does not include.) Pursuant to Local Rule 3-12(a)(2), it appears likely that there will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or the possibility of conflicting results if the cases are conducted before different Judges. Dated: June 5, 2006 Respectfully submitted,

By:

/s/ Eric B. Fastiff Eric B. Fastiff

James M. Finberg Barry R. Himmelstein Michael W. Sobol Eric B. Fastiff LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 30th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Individual and Representative Plaintiffs Benson B. Roe and Paul Goltz

-2-

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED CASE NO. C-06-0672-VRW

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

PROOF OF SERVICE BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY I am a citizen of the United States and employed in San Francisco County, California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is Embarcadero Center West, 275 Battery Street, 30th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-3339. On June 5, 2006, I caused to be deposited with Federal Express, a true and correct copy of the within documents: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED in a sealed envelope, addressed to the parties in Roe, et al. v. AT&T Corp., et al., case no. C 0603467 MMC as follows: AT&T CORP. c/o CT Corporation System 818 West Seventh St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF CALIFORNIA, INC. c/o CT Corporation System 818 West Seventh St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 SBC LONG DISTANCE, LLC c/o CT Corporation System 818 West Seventh St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 Following ordinary business practices, the envelope was sealed and placed for collection by Federal Express on this date, and would, in the ordinary course of business, be PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY c/o CT Corporation System 818 West Seventh St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 AT&T INC. c/o CT Corporation System 350 N. St. Paul Dallas, TX 75201

20 retrieved by Federal Express for overnight delivery on this date. 21 I declare that I am a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service 22 was made. 23 Service on the parties to Hepting, et al. v. AT&T Corp. et al., case no. C-06-067224 VRW was made by electronic filing using the Court's CM/ECF system. 25 Executed on June 5, 2006, at San Francisco, California. 26 27 28
540902.1

\s\ Barry R. Himmelstein Barry R. Himmelstein -3ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED CASE NO. C-06-0672-VRW