Fernando et al v. eBay, Inc. et al

Filing 169

ORDER TERMINATING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. (100 in 4:10-cv-01668-SBA, 135 in 4:10-cv-02500-SBA). Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 3/28/2016. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MOISES ZEPEDA, and others, Plaintiffs, United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 Case No. 10-cv-02500 SBA Case No. 10-cv-01668 SBA v. PAYPAL, INC., and others, Defendants. 14 ORDER TERMINATING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Re: Dkt. No. 100 15 16 DEVINDA FERNANDO, and others, Plaintiffs, 17 v. 18 19 PAYPAL, INC., Defendants. 20 21 22 This Court long ago ordered attorney Marina Trubitsky and the plaintiffs in the 23 Fernando action to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for their failure to 24 appear at the second day of a Court-ordered settlement conference. Dkt. No. 100. The 25 Court’s order was motivated in part by concern about two potential conflicts: (1) conflicts 26 between the class and class counsel in Fernando and two other cases, Zepeda v. Paypal 27 and Dunkel v. eBay, Inc., No. 12-cv-01452 EJD; and (2) conflicts between Trubitsky and 28 local counsel David Hicks, who attended both days of the conference. Case Nos. 10-cv-02500 and 10-cv-01668 SBA 1 The Court’s concerns about the first conflict have been ameliorated by subsequent 2 events. In Zepeda, the Court preliminarily approved settlement of class-wide claims. Dkt. 3 No. 281. In Dunkel, the Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss. Dkt. No. 101. 4 There is no longer the same need to protect the class members in Zepeda and Dunkel. 5 As to any conflict between colleagues Trubitsky and Hicks, that conflict can best be 6 resolved through the pending motions for attorneys’ fees at docket numbers 295, 296 and 7 297 in Zepeda. 8 9 The Court determines that the Order to Show Cause has been satisfied by Trubitsky’s response. She declared that her failure to appear was due to a family emergency caused by an illness to two family members. Dkt. Nos. 106, 106-1. The Court 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 therefore finds that her failure was not willful or in bad faith. Her failure to appear did put 12 her co-counsel David Hicks into a challenging position and caused expenses to be incurred 13 by defendants and counsel. But under the circumstances, the Court finds that a sanction is 14 not warranted. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 18 Dated: March 28, 2016 _____________________________________ NATHANAEL M. COUSINS United States Magistrate Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?