Hibnick v. Google Inc.
Filing
28
ORDER RELATING CASE. The court finds that the cases are related within the meaning of Rule 3-12(a). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court shall immediately relate Eva Hibnick, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al., Case No. CV 10-00672-JW and Rochelle Williams, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al., Case No. CV 10-02509-PVT. Related cases: Create association to 5:10-cv-02509-PVT. Motions terminated: 23 MOTION to Relate Case filed by Rochelle Williams. Signed by Judge James Ware on 6/25/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2010)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Eva Hibnick, et al., ___________________________________/ Rochelle Williams, et al., v. Google Inc., Defendant. / Plaintiffs, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION NO. CV 10-00672 JW NO. CV 10-02509 PVT ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RELATE CASES
United United States District Court
11
For the Northern District of California
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related. (See Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related, hereafter, "Motion," CV 10-00672-JW Docket Item No. 23.) Plaintiffs seek the Court's determination as to whether Rochelle Williams, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al., Case No. CV 10-02509-PVT ("Second Action"), should be related to Eva Hibnick, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al., Case No. CV 10-00672-JW ("First Action"). Plaintiffs contend that both cases concern substantially the same transactions, events, questions of law, and alleged violations of federal and California state privacy law committed by the same Defendant. (Motion at 2.) To date, Defendant has not filed any opposition. Civil Local Rule 3-12(a) provides: An action is related to another action when: (1) The actions concern substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event; and
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(2) It appears likely that there will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are conducted before different judges. Here, the Court finds that the two actions involve the same Defendant, the same alleged feature created by Defendant on its website, the same alleged violations of federal and California state privacy law, and a substantially similar core set of underlying events.1 Plaintiffs in both cases allege that Defendant's Google Buzz service made private data belonging to Defendant's Gmail users, including Plaintiffs, public without their knowledge or authorization. (See id.) In light of the substantial similarity of parties and events, the Court finds that there is a risk of "an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are conducted before different judges." Thus, the court finds that the cases are related within the meaning of Rule 312(a). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court shall immediately relate Eva Hibnick, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al., Case No. CV 10-00672-JW and Rochelle Williams, et al. v. Google, Inc., et al., Case No. CV 10-02509-PVT.
United States District Court
11
For the Northern District of California
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Dated: June 25, 2010
JAMES WARE United States District Judge
(Compare Class Action Complaint, CV 10-02509-PVT Docket Item No. 1 with First Amended Class Action Complaint, CV 10-00672-JW Docket Item No. 5.) 2
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO: Adel A. Nadji anadji@audetlaw.com Albert Gidari agidari@perkinscoie.com David Burman dburman@perkinscoie.com Donald Amamgbo damamgbo@amamgbolaw.com Donna F Solen dsolen@masonlawdc.com Gary E. Mason gmason@masonlawdc.com Jonas Palmer Mann jmann@audetlaw.com Michael D. Braun service@braunlawgroup.com Michael Francis Ram mram@ramolson.com Philip A. Leider pleider@perkinscoie.com Reginald Von Terrell reggiet2@aol.com Susan D Fahringer sfahringer@perkinscoie.com William M. Audet waudet@audetlaw.com
Dated: June 25, 2010
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: /s/ JW Chambers Elizabeth Garcia Courtroom Deputy
United States District Court
11
For the Northern District of California
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
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?