James v. UMG Recordings, Inc.
Filing
57
ORDER consolidating cases 11-2431 and 11-1613 only (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2011)
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?