IN RE LYFT, INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

Filing 34

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting #33 Stipulation Regarding Stay of Action.**Docket No. #26 is terminated, was re-filed as docket no. #33 .** (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2021)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
Matthew Rawlinson (SBN 231890)
140 Scott Drive
Menlo Park, California 94025
T: [phone] / F: [phone]
[e-mail]
Colleen C. Smith (SBN 231216)
12670 High Bluff Drive
San Diego, California 92130
T: [phone] / F: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Lyft, Inc., Logan Green,
John Zimmer, Brian Roberts, Prashant (Sean)
Aggarwal, Jonathan Christodoro, Ben Horowitz,
Valerie Jarrett, David Lawee, Hiroshi Mikitani, Ann
Miura-Ko, and Mary Agnes (Maggie) Wilderotter
[Additional Counsel on Signature Pages]

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14

OAKLAND DIVISION

15
IN RE LYFT, INC. DERIVATIVE
16 LITIGATION

Lead Case No. 4:20-cv-09257-HSG

17
18 This Document Relates to:

JOINT STIPULATION AND
ORDER REGARDING STAY OF
ACTION

19

Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

ALL ACTIONS

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

JOINT STIPULATION AND [-------------] ORDER
PROPOSED
REGARDING STAY OF ACTION
CASE NO. 4:20-cv-09272-HSG

1

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Vishal Mehta, Yao Hong Kok, and Ron Chenoy, (together,

2

“Plaintiffs”) each filed putative stockholder derivative actions on September 30, 2020, December

3

21, 2020 and December 21, 2020, respectively, on behalf of Nominal Defendant Lyft, Inc.

4

(“Lyft” or the “Company”) against Defendants John Zimmer, Logan Green, Brian Roberts,

5

Prashant (Sean) Aggarwal, David Lawee, Hiroshi Mikitani, Ann Miura-Ko, Mary Agnes

6

(Maggie) Wilderotter, Jonathan Christodoro, Ben Horowitz, and Valerie Jarrett (the “Individual

7

Defendants,” and collectively with Lyft, “Defendants”) (collectively with Plaintiffs, the

8

“Parties”);

9

WHEREAS, on January 4, 2021, the Court consolidated Plaintiffs’ respective derivative

10

actions into the above-captioned derivative case (the “Consolidated Derivative Action”) (ECF

11

No. 9);

12

WHEREAS, an earlier-filed and factually related securities class action is pending in the

13

United States District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned In re Lyft, Inc.

14

Securities Litigation, Lead Case No. 4:19-cv-02690-HSG (the “Federal Class Action”), in which

15

plaintiff asserts federal securities claims against the Company and certain of its current and

16

former officers and directors (all of whom are defendants in the Consolidated Derivative

17

Action);

18
19
20
21
22

WHEREAS, there is substantial overlap between the facts and circumstances alleged in
the Consolidated Derivative Action and the Federal Class Action;
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2021, the Court entered an order relating the Consolidated
Derivative Action to the Federal Class Action (ECF No. 17);
WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred concerning the most efficient manner in

23

which to litigate the derivative claims in the Consolidated Derivative Action and agree that

24

resolution of the claims in the Federal Class Action may help inform the manner in which this

25

Consolidated Derivative Action proceeds;

26
27

WHEREAS, in an effort to proceed in the most efficient manner, the Parties agree that
this Consolidated Derivative Action should be stayed on the terms below.

28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

1

---------------JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
REGARDING STAY OF ACTION
CASE NO. 4:20-cv-09272-HSG

1

IT IS ACCORDINGLY HEREBY STIPULATED by and among the Parties through their

2

respective counsel of record and subject to the approval of the Court, in order to facilitate the

3

efficient prosecution of this action, as follows:

4

1.

This Consolidated Derivative Action shall be temporarily stayed in its entirety

5

(including all discovery) until this Court enters final judgment or issues a ruling on any motions

6

for summary judgment filed in the Federal Class Action, whichever is earlier.

7
8

2.

Any previously scheduled hearings or deadlines, including the deadline to answer,

move, or otherwise respond to the complaints in the Consolidated Derivative Action are vacated.

9
10

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

11

Dated: February 16, 2021

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Respectfully submitted,

THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C.

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

/s/ Robert C. Moest
Robert C. Moest, Of Counsel, SBN 62166
2530 Wilshire Boulevard, Second Floor
Santa Monica, California 90403
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

/s/ Colleen C. Smith
Colleen C. Smith (CA Bar. No. 231216)
12670 High Bluff Drive
San Diego, CA 92130
T: [phone] / F: [phone]
[e-mail]

Timothy Brown
240 Townsend Square
Oyster Bay, NY 11771
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
Adam Apton
388 Market Street, Suite 1300
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415-484-1294
Email: [e-mail]

Matthew Rawlinson (CA Bar. No. 231890)
140 Scott Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025
T: [phone] / F: [phone]
[e-mail]
Counsel for Defendants Lyft, Inc., Logan
Green, John Zimmer, Brian Roberts,
Prashant Aggarwal, Jonathan
Christodoro, Ben Horowitz, Valerie
Jarrett, David Lawee, Hiroshi Mikitani,
Ann Miura-Ko, and Mary Agnes
Wilderotter

26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

2

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
----------------REGARDING STAY OF ACTION
CASE NO. 4:20-cv-09272-HSG

1

4

Gregory M. Nespole
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, New York 10006
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.363.7171
Email: [e-mail]

5

Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs

2
3

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

3

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
----------------REGARDING STAY OF ACTION
CASE NO. 4:20-cv-09272-HSG

1
2
3
4

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
I, Colleen C. Smith, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this
Joint Stipulation and [Proposed] Order regarding Stay of Action. In compliance with Civil L.R.
5-1(i), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each

5
6
7

of the other signatories.
Dated: February 16, 2021

By: /s/ Colleen C. Smith

8
9
10
11

*

*

*

ORDER
PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13
14
15

Dated: 2/17/2021

___________________________________
The Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
_---------------REGARDING STAY OF ACTION
CASE NO. 4:20-cv-09272-HSG