James v. UMG Recordings, Inc.

Filing 57

ORDER consolidating cases 11-2431 and 11-1613 only (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2011)

Download PDF
1 PHILLIPS, ERLEWINE & GIVEN LLP DAVID M. GIVEN (dmg@phillaw.com) 2 NICHOLAS A. CARLIN (nac@phillaw.com) ALEXANDER H. TUZIN (aht@phillaw.com) 3 50 California Street, 35th Floor San Francisco, California 94111 4 Telephone: 415/398-0900 Facsimile: 415/398-0911 5 LAW OFFICES OF LEONARD B. SIMON P.C. 6 LEONARD B. SIMON (lsimon@rgrdlaw.com) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 7 San Diego, California 92101 Telephone: 619/338-4549 8 Facsimile: 619/231-7423 9 [ADDITIONAL COUNSEL ON SIGNATURE PAGE] 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 15 ROB ZOMBIE, a/k/a Robert Wolfgang Zombie, ) ) f/k/a Robert Cummings; WHITE ZOMBIE, a ) 16 general partnership; WHITESNAKE, a doing business designation of David Coverdale, by and ) ) 17 for WHITESNAKE PRODUCTIONS (OVERSEAS) LIMITED; and DAVE MASON, ) 18 individually and on behalf of all others similarly ) ) situated, ) 19 ) Plaintiffs, ) 20 ) vs. ) 21 ) UMG RECORDINGS, INC., a Delaware ) 22 corporation, ) ) Defendant. 23 ) 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. CV11-02431 SI STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASE WITH CASE NO. CV11-01613 SI 1 This stipulation is based on the following facts: 2 1. On June 1, 2011, this Court entered an order granting plaintiffs’ administrative 3 motion to relate this case with lead case James v. UMG Recordings, Inc., Case No. CV11-01613 SI 4 (the “James” action) (Doc. No. 19). 5 2. Plaintiffs have requested that defendant agree to consolidate the James action with 6 this action. Defendant is agreeable to such consolidation solely for administrative convenience and 7 for no other reason, and on that basis is willing to stipulation to consolidation, on the terms set out 8 herein. 9 3. The parties hereby agree and stipulate that this action may be consolidated for all 10 purposes with the James action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(2). 11 4. The parties agree and stipulate as a material condition of this stipulation that 12 consolidation of these two actions shall not be used or considered in any manner, directly or 13 indirectly, for any purpose unrelated to consolidation, including but not limited to in connection with 14 any motion concerning class certification. The parties further agree that this stipulation is without 15 prejudice to Defendant’s right to move to sever the actions at such time as Defendant deems such a 16 motion advisable, and plaintiffs reserve the right to oppose that motion. 17 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 18 DATED: December 13, 2011 19 PHILLIPS, ERLEWINE & GIVEN LLP DAVID M. GIVEN NICHOLAS A. CARLIN ALEXANDER H. TUZIN 20 21 22 23 24 /s/ David M. Given DAVID M. GIVEN 50 California Street, 35th Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: 415/398-0900 Facsimile: 415/398-0911 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASE WITH CASE NO. CV11-01613 SI - CV11-02431 SI -1- 1 LAW OFFICES OF LEONARD B. SIMON P.C. LEONARD B. SIMON 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, California 92101 Telephone: 619/338-4549 Facsimile: 619/231-7423 2 3 4 LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP MICHAEL W. SOBOL ERIC B. FASTIFF ROGER N. HELLER CECELIA HAN 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: 415/956-1000 Facsimile: 415/956-1008 5 6 7 8 9 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class 11 DATED: December 13, 2011 JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP JEFFREY D. GOLDMAN RYAN S. MAUCK BRIAN M. YATES 12 13 14 Formatted: Left /s/ Jeffrey D. Goldman JEFFREY D. GOLDMAN 15 16 18 1900 Avenue of the Stars, 7th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: 310/203-8080 Facsimile: 310/203-0567 19 Attorneys for Defendant 17 20 * 21 * [PROPOSED] ORDER 22 23 * Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 DATED: 26 12/16/11 THE HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28 STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASE WITH CASE NO. CV11-01613 SI - CV11-02431 SI -2-

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?