Filed: Jun. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 16, 2014
Summary: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULES 3-12(b) AND 7-11 VINCE CHHABRIA, District Judge. Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12(b) and 7-11 of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Paul Ansfield, the plaintiff in the putative related Ansfield case (as defined below), hereby moves the Court to consider whether the following three cases, all filed in the Northern District of California, qualify as related actions
Summary: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULES 3-12(b) AND 7-11 VINCE CHHABRIA, District Judge. Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12(b) and 7-11 of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Paul Ansfield, the plaintiff in the putative related Ansfield case (as defined below), hereby moves the Court to consider whether the following three cases, all filed in the Northern District of California, qualify as related actions:..
More
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULES 3-12(b) AND 7-11
VINCE CHHABRIA, District Judge.
Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12(b) and 7-11 of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Paul Ansfield, the plaintiff in the putative related Ansfield case (as defined below), hereby moves the Court to consider whether the following three cases, all filed in the Northern District of California, qualify as related actions:
Case Name Case Number Judge Assigned Date Filed
Ansfield v. Infoblox No. 14-cv-02500-VC Hon. Vince May 30, 2014
Inc., et. al. Chhabria
("Ansfield")
Beqaj v. Infoblox No. 14-cv-02564-PJH Hon. Phyllis J. June 4, 2014
Inc., et al. ("Beqaj") Hamilton
Achey, et al. v. No. 14-cv-02644-BLF Hon. Beth Labson June 9, 2014
Infoblox Inc., et al. Freeman
("Achey")
Civil Local Rule 3-12(a) provides that an 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." These criteria are met here.
All three cases are putative class actions, brought on behalf of Infoblox Inc. stockholders. Plaintiffs in all the actions name the same defendants and allege similar claims of securities fraud pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
Given that the same parties, transactions and events are involved in all three cases, it appears likely that there will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense and possible conflicting results, if the three cases are conducted before different Judges. Accordingly, the Court should relate these actions under Civil Local Rule 3-12.
In compliance with Local Rule 7-11, movant obtained a stipulation from the plaintiffs in both actions, agreeing that the cases should be related. Movant also conferred with counsel for the defendant, who stated defendant has no objection to the filing of this Administrative Motion, nor to the relation of the actions. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff respectfully requests the Court enter an order relating the Ansfield, Beqaj and Achey actions.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
PAUL ANSFIELD, Individually and Case No. 3:14-cv-2500-VC
On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Plaintiff, RELATING ACTIONS
v.
Date Filed: May 30, 2014
INFOBLOX INC., ROBERT D.
THOMAS, and REMO E. CANESSA,
Defendants.
DONNA L. ACHEY and LINDSAY E. Case No. 5:14-cv-02644-BLF
DURHAM, Individually and on Behalf
of All Others Similarly Situated Date Filed: June 9, 2014
Plaintiffs,
v.
INFOBLOX INC., ROBERT D.
THOMAS, and REMO E. CANESSA,
Defendants.
SAFEDIN BEQAJ, Individually and on Case No. 4:14-cv-02564-PJH
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Date Filed: June 4, 2014
Plaintiff,
v.
INFOBLOX INC., ROBERT D.
THOMAS, and REMO E. CANESSA,
Defendants.
WHEREAS, between May 30, 2014 and June 9, 2014, the above-captioned actions ("Related Actions") were filed;
WHEREAS, each action is a purported class action brought by, and on behalf of, the Infoblox Inc. public stockholders. Plaintiffs in all the Related Actions name the same defendants and allege similar claims of securities fraud pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
WHEREAS, all parties to the Related Actions agree that these matters should be related before one Judge;
WHEREAS, all parties to the Related Actions agree that the actions are likely to result in unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are conducted before different Judges;
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Parties to these Related Actions, by and through their respective undersigned counsel, and agreed that the above captioned actions should be Related pursuant to Civil Local Rules 3-12, 7-11 and 7-12.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Based on the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby approves the Stipulation. IT IS SO ORDERED.
