In re Google Referrer Header Privacy Litigation

Filing 36

STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3.d filed byGoogle Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A to Statement of Recent Decision)(Related document(s) #29 ) (Edwards, Randall) (Filed on 11/16/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 RANDALL W. EDWARDS (S.B. #179053) redwards@omm.com SAMUEL ZUN (S.B. #264930) szun@omm.com O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-3823 Telephone: (415) 984-8700 Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc. 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 PALOMA GAOS, 13 Case No. 10-cv-04809-EJD Plaintiff, 14 v. 15 GOOGLE INC., 16 STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION Hearing Date: Oct. 28, 2011 Time: 9:00 a.m. Place: Courtroom 1, 5th Floor Judge: Hon. Edward J. Davila Defendant. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION 10CV-04809-EJD 1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(d)(2), and in connection with its Motion to Dismiss 2 Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint, Docket No. 29, Defendant Google Inc. hereby submits the 3 attached recent decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California 4 in Low v. LinkedIn Corp., Case No. 11-cv-01468-LHK (N.D. Cal. Nov. 11, 2011), in which the 5 court granted defendant LinkedIn Corp.’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to 6 Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of Article III standing. A true and correct copy of the court’s order 7 granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss is attached as Exhibit A. 8 9 Dated: November 16, 2011 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 10 11 12 13 By: /s/ Randall W. Edwards Randall W. Edwards Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- STATEMENT OF RECENT DECISION 10CV-04809-EJD

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?