Shughrou v. Euromarket Designs, Inc.

Filing 7

STIPULATION AND ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS PENDING DECISION ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER CASES PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. SECTION 1407 FOR COORDINATED OR CONSOLIDATED PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 6/6/2011. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2011)

1 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
A Limited Liability Partnership
Including Professional Corporations
2
P. CRAIG CARDON, Cal. Bar No. 168646
3 DAVID R. GARCIA, Cal. Bar No. 151349
ELIZABETH S. BERMAN, Cal. Bar No. 252377
4 BRIAN R. BLACKMAN, Cal. Bar No. 196996
Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor
5 San Francisco, California 94111-4109
Telephone: [phone]
6 Facsimile: 415-434-3947
[e-mail]
7 [e-mail]
[e-mail]
8 [e-mail]
9 Attorneys for Defendant
EUROMARKET DESIGNS, INC.
10 d/b/a CRATE & BARREL
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14

Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

JESSICA SHUGHROU, an individual, on
15 behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated,
16
Plaintiffs,
17
v.
18
EUROMARKET DESIGNS, INC., an
19 Illinois corporation, and DOES 1 through
50, inclusive,
20
Defendants.
21

CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND [Proposed]
ORDER STAYING PROCEEDINGS
PENDING DECISION ON
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO
TRANSFER CASES PURSUANT TO 28
U.S.C. § 1407 FOR COORDINATED
OR CONSOLIDATED PRETRIAL
PROCEEDINGS
Complaint Filed:

May 11, 2011

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
W02-WEST:1LDC2\403611830.1
Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

-1-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER]
STAYING PROCEEDINGS

1

WHEREAS, on March 1, 2011, Plaintiff Jessica Shughrou ("Plaintiff") filed

2 her Complaint against Defendant Euromarket Designs, Inc. d/b/a Crate & Barrel ("Crate &
3 Barrel") in the above-captioned case, Shughrou v. Crate & Barrel, Case No. 4:11-cv4 02325-LB (N.D. Cal.) ("Shughrou");
5
6

WHEREAS, the following five related cases have also been filed against

7 Crate & Barrel:
8
9

1.

10

Dardarian v. Crate & Barrel, Case No. 3:11-cv-00945-JSW (N.D. Cal.)
("Dardarian")

11
12

2.

13

O'Connor v. Crate & Barrel, Case No. 3:11-cv-02140-SC (N.D. Cal.)
("O'Connor")

14
15

3.

16

Salmonson v. Crate & Barrel, Case No. 2:11-cv-02446-PSG -PLA (C.D.
Cal.) ("Salmonson")

17
18

4.

19

Heon v. Crate & Barrel, Case No. 3:11-cv-00769-JLS -BGS (S.D. Cal.)
("Heon")

20
21
22

5.

Campbell v. Crate & Barrel, Case No. 3:11-cv-01368-JSW (N.D. Cal.)
("Campbell");

23
24

WHEREAS, plaintiffs in all six of these actions purport to represent a class

25 of California consumers and allege that Crate & Barrel unlawfully requested and recorded
26 personal identification information from customers who purchased goods using credit
27 cards at Crate & Barrel's retail establishments;
28
W02-WEST:1LDC2\403611830.1
Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

-2-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER]
STAYING PROCEEDINGS

1

WHEREAS, plaintiffs in all six actions allege that this practice violates

2 California Civil Code § 1747.08 (the "Song-Beverly Credit Card Act" or "Act");
3
4

WHEREAS, all six actions will require a court to resolve nearly identical

5 factual issues relating to a single common defendant, Crate & Barrel;
6
7

WHEREAS, the parties agree that centralization of all six actions for

8 coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1407, because
9 they share common factual questions, and also because centralization would be convenient
10 and would promote the just and efficient conduct of pretrial proceedings;
11
12

WHEREAS, on May 11, 2011, before the United States Judicial Panel on

13 Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML"), Crate & Barrel filed a Motion to Transfer Heon,
14 Dardarian, O'Connor, Campbell and Salmonson for coordinated or consolidated pretrial
15 proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407;
16
17

WHEREAS, on May 31, 2011, Crate & Barrel filed a Notice of Tag-Along

18 Action before the JPML seeking to centralize Shughrou together with the actions already
19 encompassed by its Motion to Transfer;
20
21

WHEREAS, all six actions are likely to be centralized because they share

22 common factual questions, and also because centralization would be convenient and would
23 promote the just and efficient conduct of pretrial proceedings. See, e.g., In re Payless
24 Shoesource, Inc., California Song-Beverly Credit Card Act Litig., 609 F. Supp. 2d 1372
25 (J.P.M.L. 2009) (centralizing two putative class actions alleging identical violations of the
26 Song-Beverly Credit Card Act).
27
28
W02-WEST:1LDC2\403611830.1
Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

-3-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER]
STAYING PROCEEDINGS

1

WHEREAS, conducting pretrial proceedings while Crate & Barrel's Motion

2 to Transfer is pending would impose an undue burden on the parties and the Court if the
3 JPML ultimately grants Crate & Barrel's Motion to Transfer, because any pretrial
4 proceedings conducted now would likely be wasted or need to be repeated;
5
6

WHEREAS, neither party will suffer any prejudice, hardship or inequity if

7 these proceedings are stayed pending the JPML's decision on Crate & Barrel's Motion to
8 Transfer;
9
10

WHEREAS, the Court has the inherent power to stay all proceedings

11 pending the JPML's decision on Crate & Barrel's Motion to Transfer;
12
13

WHEREAS, staying all proceedings pending the JPML's decision on Crate

14 & Barrel's Motion to Transfer would serve the interests of judicial economy and
15 efficiency, for all the reasons discussed above;
16
17

WHEREAS, on June 1, 2011, the parties in Dardarian filed a substantially

18 similar Stipulation and Proposed Order Staying Proceedings pending the JPML's decision
19 on Crate & Barrel's Motion to Transfer;
20
21

WHEREAS, on June 2, 2011, the parties in Campbell filed a substantially

22 similar Stipulation and Proposed Order Staying Proceedings pending the JPML's decision
23 on Crate & Barrel's Motion to Transfer;
24
25

WHEREAS, on June 2, 2011, the parties in O'Connor filed a substantially

26 similar Stipulation and Proposed Order Staying Proceedings pending the JPML's decision
27 on Crate & Barrel's Motion to Transfer;
28
W02-WEST:1LDC2\403611830.1
Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

-4-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER]
STAYING PROCEEDINGS

1

WHEREAS, on June 2, 2011, District Judge Jeffrey S. White entered orders

2 staying the proceedings in Dardarian and Campbell pending the JPML's decision on Crate
3 & Barrel's Motion to Transfer;
4
5

WHEREAS, courts routinely stay all proceedings pending the JPML's

6 determination of a motion to transfer based on the likelihood of transfer, the absence of
7 prejudice, and the interests of judicial economy and efficiency. See, e.g., Clark v. Payless
8 Shoesource, Inc., Case No. 08-CV-08213 (C.D. Cal. Order filed Dec. 29, 2008) (entering
9 stipulated order staying all proceedings in a putative class action alleging violations of the
10 Song-Beverly Credit Card Act); Oregon ex rel. Kroger v. Johnson & Johnson, Case No.
11 11-CV-86-AC, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39187 (D. Or., Apr. 8, 2011) (granting motion to
12 stay pending JPML decision on motion to transfer); Barnes v. Equinox Group, Inc., Case
13 No. C 10-03586, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138863 (N.D. Cal., Dec. 30, 2010) (same);
14 Cottle-Banks v. Cox Communications, Inc., Case No. 10-cv-2133, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
15 138195 (S.D. Cal., Dec. 30, 2010) (same); Gordillo v. Bank of Am., Case No. 1:09-cv16 01954, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7954 (E.D. Cal., Jan. 13, 2010) (same); Sanborn v.
17 Asbestos Corp., Ltd., Case No. C 08-5260, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7528 (N.D. Cal., Jan.
18 27, 2009) (same); Lyman v. Asbestos Defendants (B*P), Case No. C 07-4240, 2007 U.S.
19 Dist. LEXIS 78766 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 10, 2007) (same); Nielsen v. Merck and Co., Case No.
20 C 07-00076, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21250 (N.D. Cal., Mar. 15, 2007) (same); Collum v.
21 Astrazenca Pharm., L.P., Case No. C 06-0662, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64861 (N.D. Cal.,
22 Aug. 29, 2006) (same); Rivers v. The Walt Disney Co., 980 F. Supp. 1358, 1362 (C.D. Cal.
23 1997) (granting motion to stay pending JPML decision on motion to transfer, holding:
24 "[I]t appears that a majority of courts have concluded that it is often appropriate to stay
25 preliminary pretrial proceedings while a motion to transfer and consolidate is pending with
26 the MDL Panel because of the judicial resources that are conserved.");
27
28
W02-WEST:1LDC2\403611830.1
Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

-5-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER]
STAYING PROCEEDINGS

1

NOW THEREFORE, it is stipulated by the undersigned counsel on behalf of

2 the parties below, and subject to the Court's approval, that:
3
4

All proceedings in this action are stayed pending the JPML's decision on

5 Crate & Barrel's Motion to Transfer Cases for Consolidated or Coordinated Pretrial
6 Proceedings (MDL No. 2260).
7
8

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

9
10 Dated: June 3, 2011

JACZKO GODDARD LLP

11
By

12

s/ Allison H. Goddard
ALLISON H. GODDARD

13
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JESSICA SHUGHROU

14
15
16

Dated: June 3, 2011

17

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

By

s/ Elizabeth S. Berman
P. CRAIG CARDON
DAVID R. GARCIA
BRIAN R. BLACKMAN
ELIZABETH S. BERMAN

18
19
20
21

Attorneys for Defendant
EUROMARKET DESIGNS, INC.
d/b/a CRATE & BARREL

22
23
24
25

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
June 6
11
Dated:_____________, 20___

______________________________________
Laurel Beeler
United States Magistrate Judge
Northern District of California

26
27
28
W02-WEST:1LDC2\403611830.1
Case No. 4:11-cv-02325-LB

-6-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER]
STAYING PROCEEDINGS