Lou v. MA Laboratories, Inc et al

Filing 410

ORDER RE TIAN ACTION. Signed by Judge Alsup on December 26, 2013. Plaintiffs' response due December 30 at noon. Defendants' response due December 31 at noon. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/26/2013)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
8
9

ORDER RE TIAN ACTION
Plaintiffs,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15

No. C 12-05409 WHA

MICHELLE LOU, MARSHA BEER,
SIMON NIM, and JESUAN RUIZ
RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,

v.
MA LABORATORIES, INC., ABRAHAM
MA, CHRISTINE RAO, and CHRISTY
YEE,
Defendants.
/

16
17

Plaintiffs’ counsel represents overlapping putative class claims in Tian, et al. v. Ma

18

Laboratories, Inc., No. 1-11-cv-195373 (Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara).

19

The Supreme Court has recognized potential conflict of interests when an attorney represents the

20

same claim against the same defendant in different actions. Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., 527 U.S.

21

815, 856 (1999). Plaintiffs’ counsel should please submit a brief (not to exceed FIVE PAGES) by

22

DECEMBER 30 AT NOON addressing this issue. Plaintiffs’ brief should also include a procedural

23

history on the Tian action. Defendants’ may file a response (not to exceed FIVE PAGES) by

24

DECEMBER 31 AT NOON.

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 26, 2013.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE