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

Filing 80

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT And Request For Continuance Of Case Management Conference filed by John Chambers, Owen Chan, Fredy Cheung, Cisco Systems, Inc., Doe I, Doe II, Doe III, Doe IV, Doe V, Doe VI, Liu Guifu, Ivy He, Thomas Lam, Charles Lee, Roe VII, Roe VIII. (Sullivan, Kathleen) (Filed on 2/8/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

KATHRYN LEE CRAWFORD-BOYD, ESQ. (SBN 189496)
[e-mail]
RAJIKA L. SHAH, ESQ. (SBN 232994)
[e-mail]
SCHWARCZ, RIMBERG, BOYD & RADER, LLP
6310 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 360
Los Angeles, California 90048
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

6
[Counsel for Plaintiffs Continued on Next Page]
7
Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS
8
9

14

KATHLEEN M. SULLIVAN (CA Bar No. 242261)
[e-mail]
FAITH E. GAY (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
ISAAC NESSER (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, New York 10010
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

15

Attorneys for DEFENDANTS

10
11
12
13

16
17
18
19

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,

20
Plaintiffs,

21
22
23
24
25

vs.

Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx
Assigned to the Hon. Edward J. Davila
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR
CONTINUANCE OF CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Action Filed: May 19, 2011
FAC Filed: Sept. 2, 2011

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., John CHAMBERS,
Thomas LAM, Owen CHAN, Fredy
CHEUNG, and DOES 1-100,

Conference: February 17, 2012
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Courtroom: 1, 5th Floor

Defendants.

26
27
28
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

TERRI MARSH, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
BRIAN PIERCE, ESQ. (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
HUMAN RIGHTS LAW FOUNDATION
1615 L Street NW, Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20036
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
JUDITH BROWN CHOMSKY (pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF JUDITH BROWN CHOMSKY
8210 New Second Street
Elkins Park, PA 19027
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx

1
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
2
The Parties hereby submit the following Case Management Statement, and jointly request
3
a continuance of the Case Management Conference ("CMC") scheduled for February 18, 2012.
4
Procedural Posture
5
1.

The Parties filed a Joint Case Management Statement on September 16, 2011 and

6
thereafter appeared for an initial case management conference before Judge Jeremy Fogel.
7
2.

On September 26, 2011, this case was reassigned to the Hon. Edward J. Davila.

8
Docket Item No. 69. The Court scheduled a CMC for February 17, 2012. Docket Item No. 71.
9
3.

In October 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in two

10
cases involving legal issues potentially relevant here: Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum (No. 1011
1491) ("Kiobel") and Mohamad v. Rajoub (No. 11-88) ("Mohamad"). Accordingly, by order
12
dated November 9, 2011, this Court terminated Defendants’ then-pending Motion to Dismiss the
13
Complaint, without prejudice to such motion being re-filed after the Supreme Court decides
14
Kiobel and Mohamad. Docket Item No. 79. The February CMC remained as scheduled. Id.
15
Case Management Update
16
4.

The Parties have no material developments to report, and therefore incorporate and

17
restate their September 16, 2011 Joint Case Management Statement (the "Prior Statement," filed
18
as Docket Item No. 63 and attached hereto as Exhibit A) with the following minor updates:
19
a.

Plaintiffs replace Prior Statement 2:13-16 (Statement of Facts) as follows:

20
“eavesdrop, tap and intercept communications, identify, track, apprehend and torture Plaintiffs as
21
Falun Gong practitioners and subject them to gross human rights abuses, all in violation of
22
international, U.S., and California law.”
23
b.

Plaintiffs replace Prior Statement 6:28-7:3 (Statement Regarding Motions)

24
as follows, to reflect recent events: “Plaintiffs also anticipate filing a motion for class certification
25
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3): (1) within sixty (60) days following the
26
Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel and Mohamad, or (2) following the Court’s decision on a
27
renewed Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants, if any, after the Supreme Court’s decision in
28

2
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx

1

Kiobel and Mohamad and the issuance of a protective order, whichever is later.”

2

c.

Plaintiffs add to Prior Statement 7:24, to reflect recent events: “Plaintiffs

3

may file a motion for leave to amend the Complaint, if needed, based upon the Supreme Court’s

4

decision in Kiobel and Mohamad as well as any newly discovered evidence relevant to said

5

decisions, within thirty (30) days following the Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel and

6

Mohamad.

7

d.

The Parties jointly supplement Prior Statement 11:18-24 (Settlement and

8

ADR) as follows, to reflect a recent teleconference with the Court’s staff: "On January 19, 2012,

9

the Parties participated in a teleconference with the Court’s ADR staff and it was agreed that the

10

ADR process should be postponed in light of this Court’s November 9 order. A further ADR

11

teleconference is scheduled for July 26, 2012."

12

e.

Defendants replace Prior Statement 12:7-11 (Statement Regarding Other

13

References, sentence beginning "To this end") with the following, to reflect a recent event: "On

14

January 24, 2012, the Daobin court stayed Defendants’ response to the Daobin Complaint, and all

15

other proceedings in that action, until 30 days after the Supreme Court decides Kiobel and

16

Mohamad."

17

///

18

///

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx

1
2

Conclusion
In light of all the above, the Parties respectfully request that the CMC currently scheduled

3

for February 17, 2012 be adjourned to a date within 30 days after the Supreme Court decides

4

Kiobel and Mohamad. If that is acceptable, the Parties will contact the Court’s calendar clerk

5

promptly following the Supreme Court’s resolution of Kiobel and Mohamad, in order to obtain a

6

viable CMC date.

7
8
9
10

DATED: February 8, 2012

Respectfully submitted,
SCHWARCZ, RIMBERG, BOYD &
RADER, LLP

11
12
13

By:

/s/
K. Lee Crawford-Boyd, Esq.

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW FOUNDATION

14
15

By:

16
17

/s/
Terri E. Marsh, Esq. (pro hac vice)

LAW OFFICES OF JUDITH BROWN CHOMSKY

18
19

By

20

/s/
Judith Chomsky, Esq. (pro hac vice)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

21
22
23
24

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART
& SULLIVAN, LLP
By:

25

/s/
Kathleen M. Sullivan, Esq.

26

Attorneys for Defendants

27
28

4
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
Case No. 5:11-cv-02449-EJD-PSGx