Kevranian et al v. Yahoo! Inc.

Filing 27

ORDER RELATING CASES by Judge Lucy H. Koh granting 17 Motion to Relate Case; granting 20 Motion to Relate Case; granting 24 Motion to Relate Case. Case numbers 13-cv-04619, 13-cv-04980, 13-cv-04989, 13-cv-05326, and 13-cv-05388 are related to this case. (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

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

)
JOHN KEVRANIAN, and TAMMY ZAPATA, )
individually and on behalf of those similarly
)
situated,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
YAHOO! INC., a Delaware Corporation, and
)
DOES 1-10, inclusive.
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 13-CV-4547-LHK
ORDER RELATING CASES
PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE
3-12

This Order concerns four motions to relate various cases to Kevranian and Zapata v.
Yahoo! Inc., Case No. 13-CV-4547-LHK (“Kevranian Case”). According to Civil Local Rule 312(a), “[a]n action is related to another when: (1) The actions concern 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.” For the reasons stated herein, the Court GRANTS each motion to relate.
The Court first sets forth the relevant motions and responses. Yahoo! Inc. has filed a motion
to relate both Zalaya v. Yahoo! Inc., Case No. 13-CV-4619-LHK (“Zelaya Case”), and Nobles v.
Yahoo! Inc., Case No. 13-CV-4989-DMR(“Nobles Case”), to the Kevranian Case. ECF No. 17
(“Yahoo! Motion”), Case No. 13-CV-4547-LHK. No oppositions were filed in response to this
1
Case No.: 12-CV-03373-LHK
ORDER RELATING CASES PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12

1

motion. Plaintiffs in Holland, et al., v. Yahoo!, Case No. 13-CV-4980-HRL (“Holland Case”) have

2

filed a statement in support of the Yahoo! Motion, and have also requested that the Court relate the

3

Holland Case to the Kevranian Case. ECF No. 18. No oppositions were filed in response to this

4

motion. The plaintiff in Pincus v. Yahoo, Inc.!, Case No. 13-CV-05326 –HRL (“Pincus Case”)

5

filed a motion to relate the Pincus Case to the Kevranian Case. ECF No. 20. No oppositions were

6

filed in response to this motion. Finally, the plaintiff in Abrams v. Yahoo! Inc., Case No. 13-CV-

7

05338-PSG (“Abrams Case”) filed a motion to relate the Abrams Case to the Kevranian Case. ECF

8

No. 24. No oppositions were filed in response to this motion.
The Court GRANTS all of the motions to relate referenced above because all of the actions

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

9

involve the same defendant, Yahoo!, and involve substantially the same basic allegations. Based on

11

the pleadings, these cases all arise from Yahoo!’s alleged use of Plaintiffs’ and class members’

12

private and confidential email communications. Plaintiffs in each case allege that Yahoo!’s

13

interception, storage, reading and scanning of email violates Plaintiffs’ and other consumers’ rights

14

of privacy. Each case will require the Court to determine the same or similar questions of law and

15

fact including whether Yahoo!’s conduct violates California’s Invasion of Privacy Act (Cal. Penal

16

Code §§ 630, et seq.) and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 2510, et seq.),

17

and if so, what remedies Plaintiffs and class members should receive. Further, all of the Plaintiffs

18

filed their cases as proposed class actions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 on behalf of

19

identical or substantially overlapping classes.

20

Given the substantial similarity in the claims brought in these cases and the alleged conduct

21

underlying the claims, the Court finds that “[t]he actions concern substantially the same parties,

22

property, transaction or event.” Civil Local Rule 3-12(a). Further, the Court finds that there “will

23

be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are

24

conducted before different Judges.” Id.

25

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS all of the motions to relate. The Zalaya Case, Nobles

26

Case, Pincus Case, Abrams Case, and Holland Case are hereby related to the Kevranian Case for

27

all future proceedings.

28
2
Case No.: 12-CV-03373-LHK
ORDER RELATING CASES PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
Dated: December 18, 2013

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No.: 12-CV-03373-LHK
ORDER RELATING CASES PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-12