craigslist, Inc. et al v. Autoposterpro, Inc. et al

Filing 52

ORDER by Judge ARMSTRONG granting 49 Motion REOPEN AND CONSOLIDATE (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2010)

Case4:08-cv-05069-SBA Document51

Filed04/13/10 Page1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Brian Hennessy (SBN 226721) E-mail: [e-mail] Perkins Coie LLP 101 Jefferson Drive Menlo Park, CA 94025-1114 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Elizabeth L. McDougall, WA Bar No. 27026 (pro hac vice) E-mail: [e-mail] Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, Washington 98101-3099 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff craigslist, Inc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 OAKLAND DIVISION 13 14 craigslist, Inc., a Delaware corporation, 15 Plaintiff, 16 v. 17 18 19 20 Defendants. 21 craigslist, Inc., a Delaware corporation, 22 Plaintiff, 23 v. 24 25 26 27 28 Brad Johnson, Jake Carter, William Mitchell, Roman Hossain, John Doe d/b/a craigslistshop.com, and Does 2 through 25, inclusive, Defendants.
1 CASE NO. CV-08-05069 SBA, CV-08-05071 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
40753-0043/LEGAL18042236.2

Case No. CV-08-05069 SBA, CV-08-05071 SBA

Autoposterpro, Inc., PostingExperts, Inc., Roman Hossain, John Doe d/b/a craigslistadsstore.com and craigslistpromoting.com, and Does 2 through 25, inclusive,

XXXXXXXX STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REOPEN AND CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES
Dept: Before: Courtroom 3, 3rd Floor Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong

Case4:08-cv-05069-SBA Document51

Filed04/13/10 Page2 of 5

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

WHEREAS, on November 5, 2008, craigslist, Inc. ("craigslist") filed craigslist, Inc. v. Autoposterpro, Inc., PostingExperts, Inc., John Doe d/b/a craigslistadsstore.com and craigslistpromoting.com, and Does 2 through 25, inclusive (Case No.: CV-08-05069 SBA) ("Present Action"), for various causes of action based on their operation of the websites autoposterpro.com, postingexperts.com, craigslistadsstore.com, and craigslistpromoting.com, which provided auto-posting services in violation of craigslist's terms of use. WHEREAS, on February 2, 2009, craigslist, Inc. filed its First Amended Complaint, naming Roman Hossain in the Present Action. Present Action DKT#19. WHEREAS, on November 5, 2008, craigslist, Inc. filed craigslist, Inc., a Delaware corporation, v. Brad Johnson, Jake Carter, William Mitchell, John Doe d/b/a craigslistshop.com, and Does 2 through 25, inclusive (Case No.: CV-08 05071 SBA) ("Related Case"), for various causes of action based on their operation of the craigslistshop.com website, which provided autoposting services in violation of craigslist's terms of use. WHEREAS, on February 5, 2009, craigslist, Inc. filed its First Amended Complaint, naming Roman Hossain in the Related Case. Related Case DKT#12. WHEREAS, on March 5, 2009, the Court ruled that the Present Action and the Related Case were "Related Cases" pursuant to Local Rule 3-12(a), and re-assigned the Related Case to this Court (DKT #25). WHEREAS, the Present Action and the Related Case were set for a settlement conference on February 23, 2010 before Magistrate Edward M. Chen. WHEREAS, on February 9, 2010, the parties sent a joint letter to Magistrate Edward M. Chen advising him that the parties had reached an agreement resolving the claims between them and that they were in the process of obtaining client signatures on the settlement agreement. WHEREAS, on February 10, 2010, the Court issued a Clerk's Notice vacating the February 23, 2010 settlement conference (DKT #45). WHEREAS, the parties thereafter executed the settlement agreement, which resolves the claims made in the Related Case and Present Action.
2 CASE NO. CV-08-05069 SBA, CV-08-05071 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
40753-0043/LEGAL18042236.2

Case4:08-cv-05069-SBA Document51

Filed04/13/10 Page3 of 5

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

WHEREAS, the settlement agreement requires that the parties stipulate to consolidation of the Related Case and Present Action. WHEREAS, the settlement agreement requires that within three (3) business days of the Court entering an Order consolidating the Related Case and Present Action, the parties shall execute and assent to entry of a single Final Judgment on Consent and, thereafter, file the same with the Court. WHEREAS, the parties were in the process of finalizing this stipulation to consolidate the Related Case and Present Action, when the Court entered an Order on April 1, 2010, conditionally dismissing the Present Action (Dkt. #46) and the Related Case (DKT #38). WHEREAS, the parties hereby stipulate to reopen and consolidate the Present Action and Related Case for the purpose of filing the single Final Judgment on Consent, as provided by the parties' settlement agreement. WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42, the Present Action and the Related Case involve the same named Defendant and also involve common questions of law and fact, including the same causes of action and very similar fact patterns. WHEREAS, the parties agree that the Related Case should be consolidated with the Present Action for the purpose of filing the single Final Judgment on Consent, as provided by the parties' settlement agreement, and that all future filings shall be filed only in the Present Action. WHEREAS, the parties agree that the complaint attached as Exhibit A to this Stipulation ("Consolidated Complaint"), should be the operative complaint governing the consolidated action. WHEREAS, the parties agree that the Consolidated Complaint shall be deemed filed in the Present Action as of the date of the execution of this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order by the Court. IT IS SO STIPULATED.

3 CASE NO. CV-08-05069 SBA, CV-08-05071 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
40753-0043/LEGAL18042236.2

Case4:08-cv-05069-SBA Document51

Filed04/13/10 Page4 of 5

1 DATED: April 12, 2010 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 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: The Present Action and Related Case are reopened. The Related Case is consolidated with the Present Action for the purpose of filing the single Final Judgment on Consent, as provided by the parties' settlement agreement, and all future filings shall be filed only in the Present Action. The Consolidated Complaint is the operative complaint governing the consolidated action.
4 CASE NO. CV-08-05069 SBA, CV-08-05071 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
40753-0043/LEGAL18042236.2

PERKINS COIE LLP By: /s/ Brian Hennessy Brian Hennessy (SBN 226721) [e-mail] Elizabeth L. McDougall (WA Bar No. 27026) [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiff craigslist, Inc.

DATED: April 12, 2010

HYDE & SWIGART By: /s/ Joshua B. Swigart Joshua B. Swigart (SBN 225557) [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Roman Hossain

I, Brian Hennessy, hereby attest, pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, that the concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory hereto. DATED: April 12, 2010 PERKINS COIE LLP By: /s/ Brian Hennessy Brian Hennessy (SBN 226721) [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiff craigslist, Inc.

Case4:08-cv-05069-SBA Document51

Filed04/13/10 Page5 of 5

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

The Consolidated Complaint shall be deemed filed in the Present Action as of the date of the execution of this Order by the Court. Rationale of Decision Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42, the Court finds that the Present Action and Related Case involve common questions of law and fact, including the same named Defendant, the same causes of action, and very similar fact patterns. Present Action DKT # 19; Related Case DKT #12.

Dated: 6/2/10 _____________

_______________________________ Honorable Saundra Brown Armstrong

5 CASE NO. CV-08-05069 SBA, CV-08-05071 SBA STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
40753-0043/LEGAL18042236.2