Markowitz et al v. Facebook, Inc.

Filing 8

Memorandum in Opposition re 6 MOTION Relation of Cases Administrative Motion Defendant Facebooks Opposition To Plaintiffs Administrative Motion To Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related; [Proposed] Order Denying Plaintiffs Administrative Motion To Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related filed byFacebook, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Brown, Matthew) (Filed on 2/9/2010)

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
COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127) ([e-mail]) MATTHEW D. BROWN (196972) ([e-mail]) 101 California Street, 5th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-5800 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

DONALD SILVERSTRI, DAWN KEER, KIMBERLY MANCELLA, JILL SILVERMAN STRELZIN, and CHRISTOPHER LEMOLE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. FACEBOOK, INC., Defendant. ERIC MARKOWITZ, FRANK BLUEMENTHAL, LAUREN REESE, and BILLY STERN, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. FACEBOOK, INC., Defendant.

Case No. C10-cv-00429 (JF)

Case No. C10-cv-00430 (JF)

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

1162751 v1/SF

1.

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

C10-CV-00429 (JF); C10-CV-00430 (JF)

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
COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

Upon Plaintiff's Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related, filed pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12, and having considered Defendant's opposition thereto, the Court finds as follows: Under the criteria set forth in Civil Local Rule 3-12, the above-captioned cases are not related to the case captioned Sean Lane, et al. v. Facebook, et al., No. C08-CV-3845. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Motion is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February ____, 2010

Judge, U.S. District Court

1162751 v1/SF

2.

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO
CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

C10-CV-00429 (JF) ; C10-CV-00430 (JF)