Doe I et al v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 76

MOTION to Reschedule Briefing Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Local Rule 7-11 filed by Doe I, Doe II, Doe III, Doe IV, Doe V, Doe VI, Liu Guifu, Ivy He, Charles Lee, Roe VII, Roe VIII. Responses due by 11/8/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Rajika Shah)(Boyd, Kathryn) (Filed on 11/4/2011)

1

2
3

4
5

6
7

8
9

KATHRYN LEE CRAWFORD-BOYD, ESQ. (SBN 189496)
lboydcmsrbr-Iaw.com
RAJIKA SHAH, ESQ. (SBN 232994)
[e-mail]
SCHWARCZ, RIMBERG, BOYD & RADER, LLP
6310 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 360
Los Angeles, California 90048
Phone: t323) 302-9488, Fax: [phone]

r.

TERRI MARSH, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
terri.marshcmhrlf.net
BRIAN PIERCE, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
brianpcmhrlf.net
HUMAN RIGHTS LAW FOUNDATION
1615 L Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington D.C. 20036
Phone: t202) 369-4977, Fax: [phone]

12

JUDITH BROWN CHOMSKY (pro hac vice)
jchomskycmigc.org
LAW OFFICEs OF JUDITH BROWN CHOMSKY
8210 New Second Street
Elkins Park, PA 19027
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]

13

Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS

10
11

14
15
16
17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION
DOE I, DOE II, Ivy HE, DOE III, DOE
IV, DOE V, DOE VI, ROE VII, Charles
LEE, ROE VIII, and LIU Guifu, and
those individual similarly situated,

18
19

20

Plaintiffs,

23

DECLARATION OF RAJIKA SHAH IN
SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION
TO RESCHEDULE BRIEFING
[ND.Cal. Local Rule 7-11)
Action Filed: May 19, 2011
FAC Filed: Sept. 2, 2011

vs.

21

22

Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx
Assigned to the Hon. Edward J. Davila

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., John
CHAMBERS, Thomas LAM, Owen
CHAN, Fredy CHEUNG, and DOES 1100,

24
25

Defendants.

26
27
28
SCHWARCZ. RIMBERG,
BOYD & RADER, LLP
6310 San Vicente Blvd
Los Angeles, CA 90048

DECL. OF RAJIKA SHAH ISO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO RESCHEDULE BRIEFING
Case No. S:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx

I

DECLARATION OF RAJIKA SHAH

2

I, RAJIKA SHAH, declare:

3

1.

4

admitted to practice before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. I am an

5

associate with the law firm ofSchwarcz, Rimberg, Boyd & Rader, LLP ("SRBR"), one of the

6

attorneys of record for Plaintiffs. I am one of the attorneys responsible for this file and have

7

personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and if called as a witness I would and could

8

competently testify thereto.

9

2.

I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice law in the State of California and

On October 17, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in Kiobel v.

10

Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. and Mohamad v. Rajub, Nos. 10-1491 and 11-88, --- S.Ct. ----, 79

11

USLW 3728 (2011). The Supreme Court will be addressing two questions: (1) whether the issue

12

of corporate civil tort liability under the Alien Tort Statute ("ATS"), 28 U.S.C. § 1350, is a merits

13

question or instead an issue of subject matter jurisdiction; and (2) whether corporations are

14

immune from tort liability for violations of the law of nations or may instead be sued in the same

15

manner as any other private party defendant under the ATS.

16

3.

17

for Defendants, inquired whether Plaintiffs would be willing to stay the entirety of this case

18

pending a decision in Kiobel and Mohamad. I informed him that Plaintiffs opposed a stay.

19

4.

20

PLC, Nos. 02-56256, 02-56390, 09-56381, --- F.3d ----, 2011 WL 5041927 (9th Cir. 2011),

21

which also bears on a number of questions oflaw at issue in the present case.

22

5.

23

would be willing to reschedule briefing on all issues other than the following dispositive issues

24

going to the justiciability ofthe entire case: (1) whether the case presents a non-justiciable

25

political question, (2) whether the complaint challenges an act of state, and (3) whether the case

26

violates principles of international comity.

27

6.

28

proposal. Mr. Nesser informed me via email that Defendants continue to assert that the action
1

SCHWARCZ,RIMBERG,
BOYD&RADER,LLP
6310 San Vicente Blvd
Los Allgele!, CA 90048

On October 19,2011, Isaac Nesser of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, counsel

On October 25,2011, the Ninth Circuit issued an en banc decision in Sarei v. Rio Tinto,

In light ofthose decisions, on October 28,2011, I informed Mr. Nesser that Plaintiffs

On November 2,2011, I contacted Mr. Nesser for Defendants' position on Plaintiffs'

DECL. OF RAJIKA SHAH ISO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO RESCHEDULE BRIEFING
Case No. S:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx

1

ought to be stayed in its entirety until after the Supreme Court decides Kiobel and Mohamad, and

2

that they would oppose this motion. The following day I spoke with Mr. Nesser again, indicating

3

Plaintiffs' willingness to allow Defendants an opportunity to brief the three dispositive

4

justiciability issues in light of Sarei. Mr. Nesser stated that Defendants were opposed to further

5

briefing.

6

7
8

I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true
and correct.

9
10

Executed this 4th day of November, 2011, at Los Angeles, California.

11

12
13

......
Rajika L. Shah, Esq.

14

.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

26
27

28
2
SCHWARCZ, RIMBERG,
BOYD & RADER, LLP
6310 San Vicente Blvd
Los Angeles, CA 90048

DECL. OF RAJIKA SHAH ISO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO RESCHEDULE BRIEFING
Case No. S:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx