Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

STERLING INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING GROUP v. LENOVO UNITED STATES INC., 5:15-cv-00807-RMW (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150619c08
Filed: Jun. 18, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 23(g) RONALD M. WHYTE , District Judge . WHEREAS the above-referenced plaintiffs filed the 17 above-captioned cases, asserting individual and class claims on behalf of purchasers of notebook computers manufactured by defendant Lenovo containing software manufactured by defendant Superfish; WHEREAS ten other putative class actions have been filed in federal district courts throughout the U
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE SCHEDULE FOR APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 23(g)

WHEREAS the above-referenced plaintiffs filed the 17 above-captioned cases, asserting individual and class claims on behalf of purchasers of notebook computers manufactured by defendant Lenovo containing software manufactured by defendant Superfish;

WHEREAS ten other putative class actions have been filed in federal district courts throughout the United States asserting similar claims against the same defendants;

WHEREAS on June 8, 2015, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") centralized all 27 of the above-referenced actions and transferred them to this Court for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings as In re: Lenovo Adware Litigation, MDL No. 2624;

WHEREAS only certain of the ten Lenovo actions filed outside the Northern District of California have been transferred to this Court pursuant to the JPML's June 8, 2015 Transfer Order;

WHEREAS a case management conference was previously set for June 19, 2015, but subsequently vacated by this Court's May 12, 2015 Order Granting Motion for Stay, which provided that the case management conference would be reset by the Court if the litigation remained before the Court after the JPML ruled;

WHEREAS plaintiffs in the 27 actions that are now part of the In re: Lenovo Adware Litigation have conferred and agree that interim class counsel should be designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(3) to clarify "responsibility for protecting the interests of the class during precertification activities, such as making and responding to motions, conducting any necessary discovery, moving for class certifications, and negotiating settlement." Manual for Complex Litigation (Fourth) § 21.11 (2004);

WHEREAS, plaintiffs in the Lenovo actions filed outside the Northern District of California that have not yet been transferred to this Court have expressly authorized the undersigned counsel to represent to the Court that they concur in and agree to be bound by this stipulation;

WHEREAS defendants take no position on what law firm(s) should be appointed interim class counsel, but agree that interim class counsel should be appointed expeditiously to allow the litigation to proceed in an orderly and efficient manner;

WHEREAS all parties agree that interim class counsel should be appointed by the Court sufficiently in advance of the initial case management conference to allow time for all the parties to adequately prepare for that conference.

NOW THEREFORE, the above-referenced plaintiffs and defendants Lenovo and Superfish, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. Any law firm(s) seeking to be appointed interim class counsel for plaintiffs in the In re Lenovo Adware Litigation shall file moving papers on June 23, 2015; 2. Responses shall be filed on July 7, 2015; 3. Replies, if permitted by the Court, shall be filed by 5:00 pm on July 13, 2015; 4. If there are competing motions for appointment of interim class counsel, a hearing shall be held at 9:00 a.m. on July 17, 2015, or as soon thereafter as the Court is available; and 5. The initial case management conference shall be scheduled at the Court's convenience to follow the appointment of interim class counsel.

ORDER

Pursuant to Stipulation, it is SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer