Marta/ATU Local 732 Employees Retirement Plan v. Ahitov et al

Filing 17

ORDER to Consolidate and Joining Derivative Actions with Lead Case Number C11-133MJP. Counsel in all cases must arrange to receive all filings in C11-133MJP through the Electronic Case Filing System by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (MD)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10
11

CASE NO. C11-133 MJP
In re COINSTAR, INC., Securities and
Derivative Litigation

ORDER CONSOLIDATING AND
JOINING DERIVATIVE ACTIONS

12
13

CASE NO. C11-663 MJP

15

MARTA/ATU LOCAL 732
EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT PLAN
Derivatively on Behalf of COINSTAR,
INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff

16

v.

17

ARIK A. AHITOV, et. al., Defendants

14

18
19
20

CASE NO. C11-655 MJP
MELVIN BRENNER, Derivatively on
Behalf of COINSTAR, INC., a Delaware
corporation, Plaintiff,

21

v.

22

DEBORAH L. BEVIER, et al.,
Defendants

23
24
ORDER CONSOLIDATING AND JOINING
DERIVATIVE ACTIONS - 1

1

This comes before the Court on a stipulated motion consolidating actions, transferring

2 actions, and continuing pending motions. (Brenner v. Bevier, C11-655, Dkt. No. 18.) Having
3 determined that MARTA/ATU Local 732 Employees Retirement Plan v. Arik A. Ahitov (C114 663 MJP) and Brenner v. Bevier (C11-655 MJP) are substantially related to In re Coinstar
5 Securities Litigation (C11-133 MJP), the Court GRANTS the stipulation and ORDERS that the
6 actions be joined for pre-trial proceedings.
7
8

Discussion
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a), this Court can consolidate cases that “involve a common

9 question of law or fact.” A district court may consolidate actions as part of its broad discretion
10 to manage its caseload. In re Adams Apple, 829 F.2d 1484, 1487 (9th Cir. 1987); see also
11 Devlin v. Transportation Communs. Int’l Union, 175 F.3d 121, 130 (2d. Cir. 1999).
12

First, the Court consolidates MARTA/ATU Local 732 v. Ahitov and Brenner v. Bevier as

13 related shareholder derivative actions on behalf of nominal defendant Coinstar, Inc.
14 (“Coinstar”). Both actions implicate common questions of law and fact. See also 8 Moore’s
15 Federal Practice § 42.14[2] (“consolidation is common in federal securities actions . .
16 .”)(collecting cases). Hereinafter, the actions will be referred to as the “Derivative Litigation”
17 and every pleading filed in this consolidated action shall bear the following caption:
18
19
20

NO. C11-133 MJP
IN RE COINSTAR, INC.,
SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE
LITIGATION

21
22
23
24
ORDER CONSOLIDATING AND JOINING
DERIVATIVE ACTIONS - 2

LEAD CASE NO. C11-133 MJP

1

Second, the Court joins the Derivative Litigation to In re Coinstar Securities Litigation

2 (C11-133 MJP) (“the Securities Litigation”) for pre-trial proceedings. Both the Derivative
3 Litigation and the Securities Litigation challenge Defendants’ representations or material
4 omissions regarding its management of Redbox Automated Retail LLC (“Redbox”). Both
5 Derivative Plaintiffs and Securities Plaintiffs allege Defendants failed to accurately represent
6 negative factors affecting Redbox’s business, including the DVD retail industry’s shift to
7 releasing titles 28 days after the studio has begun its own distribution. (See, e.g., Packer Compl.
8 ¶ 3; Wilkerson Compl. ¶¶2-3). There are common questions of fact as to whether the statements
9 were misleading. The Court therefore finds that coordination of both litigations serve judicial
10 efficiency.
11

Conclusion

12

The Court CONSOLIDATES MARTA/ATU v. Ahitov and Brenner v. Bevier and will

13 refer to the actions as the Derivative Litigation. The Court JOINS the Derivative Litigation with
14 the Securities Litigation for pre-trial proceedings. Counsel in all cases must arrange to receive
15 all filings in C11-133 MJP through the Electronic Case Filing system.
16

The Court STRIKES the pending motion for appointment of lead plaintiff or lead counsel

17 in the Derivative Litigation.
18

The Court ORDERS all parties from the Securities Litigation and Derivative Litigation to

19 meet and confer and submit an amended Joint Status Report within fifteen (15) days of entry of
20 this Order. The Joint Status Report should address protocols regarding electronic discovery,
21 protective orders, and propose streamlined deadlines regarding any motions to dismiss.
22 \\
23 \\
24
ORDER CONSOLIDATING AND JOINING
DERIVATIVE ACTIONS - 3

1

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.

2

Dated this 25th day of May, 2011.

3

A

4
5

Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER CONSOLIDATING AND JOINING
DERIVATIVE ACTIONS - 4