"In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation"

Filing 47

GRANTING MOTION TO RELATE CASES. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court shall immediately relate Graf v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10- 04680-WHA, Albini v. Zynga; Facebook, Inc., Case No. CV 10-04723-JL, Gudac v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04793-EMC, Schreiber v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04794-JCS, Swanson v. Zynga, Case No. 10-04902-HRL, Carmel-Jessup v. Facebook; Zynga, Case No. 10-04930-MEJ and Phee v. Facebook; Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04935-SC, to In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation, Case No. CV 10-02389-JW. Defendant Zynga, in its Motion to Relate, raises the issue of whether these related actions should be consolidated into a single action. The Court invites the parties to fully brief the issue. On or before 11/22/2010, the parties shall file briefs as to whether these related actions should be consolidated into the current action, In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation or consolidated as a separate action, In Re: Zynga Litigation. In their briefs, the parties shall nominate Lead Plaintiffs as well as Lead Counsel. The Court will take the parties briefs under submission without oral argument. Motions terminated: (10 in 3:10-cv-04794-RS) First MOTION to Relate Case filed by Howard L. Schreiber, (41 in 5:10-cv-02389-JW) MOTION to Relate Case filed by Zynga Game Network Inc. Signed by Judge James Ware on 11/12/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2010)

Download PDF
Gould v. Facebook, Inc. Doc. 47 Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document47 Filed11/15/10 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation ___________________________________/ Nancy Graf, / NO. C 10-02389 JW NO. C 10-04680 WHA NO. C 10-04723 JL NO. C 10-04793 EMC NO. C 10-04794 JCS NO. C 10-04902 HRL NO. C 10-04930 MEJ NO. C 10-04935 SC 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 Shelly Albini, ___________________________________/ Valerie Gudac, et al., ___________________________________/ Howard L. Schreiber, ___________________________________/ John Swanson, ___________________________________/ Carmel-Jessup, ___________________________________/ Iris Phee, et al., v. Plaintiffs, Zynga Game Network, Inc., et al. Defendants. ___________________________________/ Dockets.Justia.com Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document47 Filed11/15/10 Page2 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Presently before the Court is Defendant Zynga Game Network's ("Zynga") Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related.1 Defendant Zynga seeks the Court's determination as to whether Graf v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04680-WHA, Albini v. Zynga; Facebook, Inc., Case No. CV 10-04723-JL, Gudac v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04793-EMC, Schreiber v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04794-JCS, Swanson v. Zynga, Case No. 10-04902-HRL, Carmel-Jessup v. Facebook; Zynga, Case No. 10-04930-MEJ and Phee v. Facebook; Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04935-SC, should be related to In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation, Case No. CV 10-02389-JW. Defendant Zynga contends that all cases arise from substantially similar factual allegations that "referrer headers" within some Facebook users' web browsers caused user information to be leaked to third parties, involve overlapping legal claims and involve overlapping parties on both sides of the litigation. (Motion at 1.) Civil Local Rule 3-12(a) provides: An action is related to another action when: (1) The action concerns substantially the same parties, property, transaction or event; and (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 eight actions involve substantially the same transactions, events and parties.2 Plaintiffs in all cases allege that via Referrer Headers sent to third parties, Zynga and Facebook allegedly disclosed unique Facebook user identification numbers ("UID"), allowing third parties to obtain information about users and their activities online. All cases involve (See Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related, hereafter, "Motion," CV 10-02389 JW, Docket Item No. 41.) (Compare Class Action Complaint, CV 10-04680-WHA, Docket Item No. 1; Class Action Complaint for (1) Violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act; (2) Violation of the Stored Communications Act; (3) Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200; (4) Violation of California's Computer Crime Law; (5) Breach of Contract; (6) Violation of Cal. Civ. Code 1572 & 1573; and (7) Unjust Enrichment, CV 10-04273-JL, Docket Item No. 1; Class Action Complaint, CV 10-04793-EMC, Docket Item No. 1; Class Action Complaint, CV 10-04794-JCS, Docket Item No. 1; Class Action Complaint, CV 10-04902-HRL, Docket Item No. 1; Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Electronic Privacy Act, the Stored Communications Act, the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Computer Crime Law, Breach of Contract, Fraud, Negligent Misrepresentation and Unfair Trace Practices, CV 10-04930-MEJ, Docket Item No. 1; and Class Action Complaint, CV 10-04935-SC, Docket Item No. 1 with Consolidated Class Action Complaint, CV 10-02389-JW, Docket Item No. 36.) 2 2 1 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 Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document47 Filed11/15/10 Page3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 overlapping causes of action and factual inquiries. The Court also finds that the two actions pose a substantial risk of inconsistent judgments. In light of the substantial similarity of parties, events and causes of action, 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 3-12(a). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court shall immediately relate Graf v. Zynga, Case No. CV 1004680-WHA, Albini v. Zynga; Facebook, Inc., Case No. CV 10-04723-JL, Gudac v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04793-EMC, Schreiber v. Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04794-JCS, Swanson v. Zynga, Case No. 10-04902-HRL, Carmel-Jessup v. Facebook; Zynga, Case No. 10-04930-MEJ and Phee v. Facebook; Zynga, Case No. CV 10-04935-SC, to In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation, Case No. CV 10-02389-JW. Defendant Zynga, in its Motion to Relate, raises the issue of whether these related actions should be consolidated into a single action. The Court invites the parties to fully brief the issue. On or before November 22, 2010, the parties shall file briefs as to whether these related actions should be consolidated into the current action, In Re: Facebook Privacy Litigation or consolidated as a separate action, In Re: Zynga Litigation. In their briefs, the parties shall nominate Lead Plaintiffs as well as Lead Counsel. The Court will take the parties' briefs under submission without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). 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: November 12, 2010 JAMES WARE United States District Judge 3 Case5:10-cv-02389-JW Document47 Filed11/15/10 Page4 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO: Benjamin Harris Richman brichman@edelson.com Charles Hyunchul Jung cjung@nassiri-jung.com James M. Penning jpenning@cooley.com Jay Edelson jedelson@edelson.com Kassra Powell Nassiri knassiri@nassiri-jung.com Matthew Dean Brown mbrown@cooley.com Michael James Aschenbrener maschenbrener@edelson.com Richard L. Seabolt rlseabolt@duanemorris.com Sean Patrick Reis sreis@edelson.com Dated: November 12, 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?