Campbell et al v. Facebook Inc.

Filing 14

MOTION to Relate Case filed by Facebook Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B)(Jessen, Joshua) (Filed on 1/29/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 OAKLAND DIVISON 11 12 13 MATTHEW CAMPBELL and MICHAEL HURLEY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, 14 First Filed Case: No. C 13-05996 PJH Related Case: No. C 14-00307 PSG CLASS ACTION Plaintiffs, 15 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RELATE CASES v. 16 FACEBOOK, INC., The Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton 17 Defendant. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RELATE CASES First Filed Case No. C 13-05996 PJH; Related Case No. C 14-00307 PSG 1 WHEREAS, on December 30, 2013, plaintiffs Matthew Campbell and Michael Hurley 2 initiated this putative class action against Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”), alleging violations of federal 3 and state law in connection with the purported scanning of URLs in private messages between 4 Facebook users (the “Campbell Action”); 5 WHEREAS, on January 21, 2014, plaintiff David Shadpour filed a separate putative class 6 action in this District against Facebook predicated on substantially similar facts and substantive 7 allegations, and asserting the same state law claims as the Campbell Complaint, captioned Shadpour 8 v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. 5:14-00307-PSG (the “Shadpour Action”); and 9 WHEREAS, the undersigned parties agree that the Campbell Action and Shadpour Action are 10 related pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12(a) because “(1) [t]he actions concern substantially the same 11 parties, property, transaction, or event; and (2) [i]t appears likely that there will be an unduly 12 burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are conducted before 13 different Judges.” 14 NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12 and 7-12, and subject to the 15 approval of the Court, the parties hereby stipulate that the Campbell Action and Shadpour Action are 16 related and request that the Court enter an order reassigning the second-filed Shadpour Action to the 17 Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton, who is overseeing the first-filed Campbell Action. 18 Respectfully submitted, 19 20 DATED: January 29, 2014 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 21 By: 22 /s/ JOSHUA A. JESSEN 23 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 24 Joshua A. Jessen, SBN 222831 JJessen@gibsondunn.com Jeana Bisnar Maute, SBN 290573 JBisnarMaute@gibsondunn.com Jessica S. Ou, SBN 280534 JOu@gibsondunn.com 1881 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 849-5300 1 25 26 27 28 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RELATE CASES First Filed Case No. C 13-05996 PJH; Related Case No. C 14-00307 PSG 1 Facsimile: (650) 849-5333 2 Christopher Chorba, SBN 216692 CChorba@gibsondunn.com 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 229-7000 Facsimile: (213) 229-7520 3 4 5 Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC. 6 7 DATED: January 29, 2014 LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN 8 9 By: /s/ Michael Sobol MICHAEL W. SOBOL 10 11 LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 12 Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857) msobol@lchb.com Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096) mgardner@lchb.com 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: 415.956.1000 Facsimile: 415.956.1008 13 14 15 16 20 Rachel Geman rgeman@lchb.com Nicholas Diamand ndiamand@lchb.com 250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10013-1413 Telephone: 212.355.9500 Facsimile: 212.355.9592 21 CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC 22 Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688) hbates@cbplaw.com Allen Carney acarney@cbplaw.com David Slade dslade@cbplaw.com 11311 Arcade Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Telephone: 501.312.8500 Facsimile: 501.312.8505 17 18 19 23 24 25 26 27 28 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs MATTHEW CAMPBELL AND MICHAEL HURLEY 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RELATE CASES First Filed Case No. C 13-05996 PJH; Related Case No. C 14-00307 PSG 1 DATED: January 29, 2014 GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 2 3 By: /s/ Lionel Glancy LIONEL Z. GLANCY 4 5 GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 6 Lionel Z. Glancy 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: (310) 201-9150 Facsimile: (310) 201-9160 Email: info@glancylaw.com 7 8 9 POMERANTZ LLP 10 Jeremy A. Lieberman Lesley F. Portnoy 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, New York 10016 Telephone: 212-661-1100 Facsimile: 212-661-8665 11 12 13 Patrick V. Dahlstrom 10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Telephone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com 14 15 16 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff DAVID SHADPOUR (Case No. 5:14-00307-PSG ) 18 19 20 21 22 23 ATTORNEY ATTESTATION Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1, I, Joshua A. Jessen, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Michael W. Sobol and Lionel Z. Glancy. DATED: January 29, 2014 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 24 25 By: /s/ JOSHUA A. JESSEN 26 27 Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC. 28 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RELATE CASES First Filed Case No. C 13-05996 PJH; Related Case No. C 14-00307 PSG 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Having considered the parties’ Stipulation, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby 3 GRANTS the parties’ Stipulation. The Campbell Action and Shadpour Action are related under Civil 4 Local Rule 3-12(a), and the Shadpour Action therefore is reassigned to this Court pursuant to Civil 5 Local Rule 3-12(f). 6 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 DATED: __________________________ ______________________________________ The Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton United States District Court Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 4 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO RELATE CASES First Filed Case No. C 13-05996 PJH; Related Case No. C 14-00307 PSG

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?