Intermec Technologies Corp. v. Palm, Inc.

Filing 51

Download PDF
Intermec Technologies Corp. v. Palm, Inc. Doc. 51 1 Emily Maxwell (Bar. No. 185646) maxwelle@howrey.com 2 HOWREY LLP 525 Market Street, Suite 3600 3 San Francisco, CA 94105 4 415-848-4947 415-848-4999 (fax) 5 Eugene A. Spector (pro hac vice) 6 espector@srkw-law.com Jeffrey J. Corrigan (pro hac vice) 7 jcorrigan@srkw-law.com 8 Theodore M. Lieverman (pro hac vice) tlieverman@srkw-law.com 9 Jay S. Cohen (pro hac vice) jcohen@srkw-law.com 10 Jonathan M. Jagher (pro hac vice) 11 jjagher@srkw-law.com SPECTOR ROSEMAN KODROFF & WILLIS, P.C. 12 1818 Market Street, Suite 2500 Philadelphia, PA 19103 13 215-496-0300 215-496-6611 (fax) 14 [ADDITIONAL COUNSEL ON SIGNATURE PAGE] 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and others similarly 16 situated UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) 22 WALMART.COM USA LLC, WAL-MART ) ) STORES, INC. and NETFLIX, INC. 23 ) Defendants. ) 24 RICHARD J. SHEELER, JR., on behalf of 20 himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. 21 25 26 27 28 HOWREY LLP Case No.: C 09-00274 JL NOTICE OF RELATED CASE PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 3-12 TO BE FILED IN CASE NO. CV-09-0002 (PJH); ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED, PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 7-11 NOTICE OF RELATED CASE DM_US:21835194_1 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Plaintiff, Richard J. Sheeler, Jr. on behalf of himself and others similarly situated (hereinafter 2 "Plaintiff") hereby respectfully submit this Notice of Related Case, Pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-12 and the 3 required Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related, Pursuant to Civil L. R. 4 7-11. 5 I. 6 APPLICABLE STANDARD UNDER CIVIL L.R. 3-12 Under Civil Local Rule 3-12, an "action is related to another when: (1) the actions concern 7 substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event, and (2) it appears likely that there will be 8 an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are 9 conducted before different Judges." Civil L.R. 3-12(a). 10 Whenever a party knows or believes that an action may be related to an action which is or was 11 pending in the Northern District, said party "must promptly file in the earliest-filed case an 12 Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related, pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-11."1 13 Civil L.R. 3-12(b). That motion must include: "(1) The title and case number of each apparently 14 related case; (2) A brief statement of the relationship of the actions according to the criteria set forth in 15 Civil L.R. 3-12(a)." 16 II. 17 18 THE NEWLY FILED SHEELER AND MEYER CASES ARE RELATED TO RESNICK AND ITS PROGENY. The Resnick case was filed in this Court on January 2, 2009. Subsequently, a number of related 19 complaints were filed. By Order dated January 16, 2009, this Court found that the following cases are 20 related: 21 22 23 24 25 "In addition to complying with Civil L.R. 7-11, a copy of the motion, together with proof of service pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-6, must be served on all known parties to each apparently related action. A 27 Chambers copy of the motion must be lodged with the assigned Judge in each apparently related case under Civil L.R. 5-1(b)." Civil L.R. 3-12(b). 28 26 HOWREY LLP (1) Resnick, et al. v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-0002 (2) O'Connor v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-0096 (3) Endzweig v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-00111 (4) Schmitz v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-00116 1 NOTICE OF RELATED CASE DM_US:21835194_1 2 1 2 3 (5) Lynch, et al. v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-00138 (6) Groce, et al. v. Netflix, Inc., et al., C 09-00139. By Order dated January 26, 2009, this Court found that the following cases also are related to 4 Resnick: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 HOWREY LLP (1) Anthony v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-0236; (2) Sivek v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-00156, filed January 13, 2009; and (3) Faris v. Netflix, Inc., et al., C-09-0180, filed January 14, 2009. After the Court's January 16, 2009 and January 26, 2009 orders, all of the above-listed cases are assigned to Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton. In addition to the above-listed cases previously found to be related to Resnick, there are several new cases which also are related to Resnick, including: (1) The above-captioned litigation, Sheeler v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al. C 09-274 (JL) ("Sheeler"), filed January 22, 2009; (2) Meyer v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C 09-00361 (BZ) ("Meyer"), filed January 27, 2009; (3) Slobodin v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C-09-225 (BZ), filed January 16, 2009; and (4) Polk-Stamps v. Walmart.com USA LLC, et al., C-09-244 (JCS), filed January 20, 2009. These recently-filed cases, like the others that came before them, are related to the original Resnick complaint. Like the previously-related cases, these cases involve the exact same transactions and events, the identical defendants, the identical or virtually identical allegations and causes of action, and the same proposed class of plaintiffs. Accordingly, there will be unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense and there will be a risk of conflicting results if these cases are not related to Resnick and assigned to Judge Hamilton like the other related cases listed above. Dated: January 28, 2009 Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Emily Maxwell Emily Maxwell HOWREY LLP 525 Market Street, Suite 3600 San Francisco, CA 94105 415-848-4947 415-848-4999 (fax) 3 NOTICE OF RELATED CASE DM_US:21835194_1 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 HOWREY LLP Paul Alexander HOWREY LLP 1950 University Avenue East Palo Alto, CA 94303 650-798-3500 650-798-3600 (fax) Eugene A. Spector Jeffrey J. Corrigan Theodore M. Lieverman Jay S. Cohen Jonathan M. Jagher SPECTOR ROSEMAN KODROFF & WILLIS, P.C. 1818 Market Street Suite 2500 Philadelphia, PA 19103 215-496-0300 215-496-6611 (fax) Lee Albert Brian Brooks MURRAY, FRANK & SAILER LLP 275 Madison Avenue, Suite 801 New York, NY 10016 (212)-682-1818 (212)-682-1892 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiff and others similarly situated NOTICE OF RELATED CASE DM_US:21835194_1 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?