Salhuana v. Diamond Foods, Inc. et al

Filing 61

ORDER CONSOLIDATING ACTIONS. Signed by Judge Alsup on January 24, 2012. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/24/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

JORGE SALHUANA, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

12
13

No. C 11-05386 WHA

ORDER CONSOLIDATING ACTIONS
v.

14

DIAMOND FOODS, INC, MICHAEL J.
MENDES, and STEVEN M. NEIL,

15

Defendants.
/

16
17

AND RELATED ACTIONS
/

18
19

An order to show cause why the following related cases should not be consolidated issued

20

on January 3, 2012:

21

C 11-05386

Salhuana v. Diamond Foods, Inc., et al.

22

C 11-05399

Mitchem v. Diamond Foods, Inc., et al.

23

C 11-05409

Woodward v. Diamond Foods, Inc., et al.

24

C 11-05457

Rall, et al. v. Diamond Foods, Inc., et al.

25

C 11-05479

Simon v. Diamond Foods, Inc., et al.

26

C 11-05615

MacFarland v. Diamond Foods, Inc., et al.

27

The deadline to show cause why the cases should not be consolidated has passed. Having

28

received no objection to consolidation, the above-stated cases are consolidated for all purposes,

1

including, but not limited to, discovery, pretrial proceedings, and trial proceedings pursuant to

2

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a).

3

The consolidated cases shall be identified as In re Diamond Foods, Inc., Securities

4

Litigation, Case No. CV 11-05386 WHA, and the files of this action shall be maintained in one

5

file under Master File No. 11-05386. Every pleading filed in the consolidated action shall bear

6

the following caption:

7
8
9

In re Diamond Foods, Inc., Securities Litigation
_______________________________________
This Document Relates to:

Case No. 11-CV-05386 (WHA)

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

12

When a pleading is intended to be applicable to some, but not all, of such actions, the docket

13

number for each individual action to which the document is intended to be applicable, shall

14

appear immediately after the words: “This Document Relates to.”

15
16

Any other action now pending or hereafter filed in this district that arises out of the same
facts and claims as alleged in these related actions shall be consolidated for all purposes as the

17
Court becomes aware of them. The parties shall notify the Court of any other action pending or
18
19

filed outside this district that may be related to the subject matter of these consolidated actions, if

20

and when they become aware of such actions.

21
22

Defendants are not required to respond to the complaint in any action consolidated into
this action, other than the consolidated complaint. A consolidated complaint shall be filed within

23
45 days of the order appointing lead counsel. The consolidated complaint shall be the operative
24
25
26
27
28
2

1
2

complaint and shall supersede all complaints in any of the actions consolidated herein.
Defendants shall respond to the consolidated complaint within 45 days after service.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6
Dated: January 24, 2012.
7

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3