Lalo v. Apple, Inc et al

Filing 68

MOTION to Relate Case filed by Apple, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Charlson, Michael) (Filed on 4/14/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Michael L. Charlson (Bar No. 122125)
Maren J. Clouse (Bar No. 228726)
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
525 University Avenue, 4th Floor
Palo Alto, California 94301
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Christopher Wolf (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
Columbia Square
555 Thirteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
Clayton C. James (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
One Tabor Center, Suite 1500
1200 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80202
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
APPLE INC., a California corporation

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18

SAN JOSE DIVISION

19
20
21
22

In re iPhone Application Litigation

Case No. CV-10-5878 LHK (PSG)
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD
BE RELATED

23
24

The Honorable Lucy H. Koh

25
26
27
28
H OGAN L OVELLS US
LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PALO ALTO

ADMIN. MOT. TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO
RELATE CASES; Case No. CV 10-5878 LHK

1

Pursuant to Local Rule 3-12 and this Court’s Case Management Order No. 1 entered

2

March 15, 2011 (Dkt. No. 36) (“CMO No.1”), Defendant Apple Inc., a California corporation

3

(“Apple”), submits this Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related to

4

give notice of the following related action: Christina Jenkins and Jessica Veffer, on behalf of

5

themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Apple, Inc., a California Corporation,

6

Defendant, Case No. 11-CV-01828-HRL, removed to this district on April 14, 2011.1 Apple

7

respectfully suggests that the Jenkins action is related to these consolidated actions.

8

The actions are related because they arise from the same or substantially identical

9

transactions, happenings or events, and call for determination of the same or substantially

10

identical questions and facts, and related questions of law. In particular, like these consolidated

11

actions, the Jenkins action involves allegations that certain software applications that can be

12

downloaded by users to work on iPhone or iPad devices capture and misuse personal identifying

13

information of iPhone and iPad users by transmitting information from the Unique Device

14

Identifier (“UDID”) associated with each device. Apple is a defendant in each of the

15

consolidated actions and is the only named defendant in the Jenkins action. The alleged capture

16

and misuse of user information from the devices’ UDID’s is claimed in all the actions to

17

constitute violations of various statutes and common law principles concerning personal privacy

18

and consumer protection.

19

For the foregoing reasons, assignment of the Jenkins action to this Court is likely to save

20

judicial and litigant resources, and it will diminish the likelihood of inconsistent results. In

21

addition, Apple believes that the Jenkins action is properly consolidated with these consolidated

22

actions as provided in the Court’s CMO No. 1.

23

In accordance with paragraph 3 of CMO No. 1, Apple has served a copy of CMO No. 1 on

24

counsel for Plaintiffs in the Jenkins action. Apple has also served a copy of the Court’s April 7,

25

2011 Order Appointing Interim Class Counsel and Executive Committee (Dkt. No. 65) and Order

26
27
28
H OGAN L OVELLS US
LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PALO ALTO

1

A copy of the Notice of Removal by which Apple removed the Jenkins action to this district, to
which the Complaint is an exhibit, is attached as Exhibit A. The Jenkins action was filed in the
Superior Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara, on March 15, 2011.
-1-

ADMIN. MOT. TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO
RELATE CASES; Case No. CV 10-5878 LHK

1

Regarding Case Schedule (Dkt. No. 66).2

2
3

Dated: April 14, 2011

HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

4

By: /s/ Michael L. Charlson
Michael L. Charlson

5

Attorneys for Defendant
APPLE INC., a California corporation

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
H OGAN L OVELLS US
LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PALO ALTO

2

A copy of the Proof of Service of those orders is attached as Exhibit B.
-2-

ADMIN. MOT. TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO
RELATE CASES; Case No. CV 10-5878 LHK