From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Google, Inc. S'Holder Derivative Litig.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Oct 25, 2011
Master File No. CV-11-04248-PJH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2011)

Opinion

Master File No. CV-11-04248-PJH

10-25-2011

In re GOOGLE INC. SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS

p] WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation Elizabeth C. Peterson Attorneys for Defendants and Nominal Defendant Google Inc. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP DARREN J. ROBBINS TRAVIS E. DOWNS III BENNY C. GOODMAN III ERIK W. LUEDEKE Travis E. Downs III ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP SHAWN A. WILLIAMS POMERANTZ HAUDEK GROSSMAN & GROSS LLP MARC I. GROSS JEREMY A. LIEBERMAN JASON S. COWART FEI-LU QIAN POMERANTZ HAUDEK GROSSMAN & GROSS LLP PATRICK V. DAHLSTROM Lead Attorneys for Plaintiffs


BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838
ELIZABETH C. PETERSON, State Bar No. 194561
CHERYL FOUNG, State Bar No. 108868
DIANE M. WALTERS, State Bar No. 148136
BRYSON S. SANTAGUIDA, State Bar No. 255173
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Attorneys for Defendants and Nominal Defendant
Google Inc.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING ADR CERTIFICATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

DATE: N/A

TIME: N/A

JUDGE: Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5, counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the following stipulation:

On August 29, 2011, three shareholder derivative actions were filed purportedly on behalf of Google Inc. ("Google"). The parties subsequently filed a Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Consolidating Actions and Appointing Lead Counsel, which was entered by the Court on September 19, 2011 ("September 19, 2011 Order"). Pursuant to the schedule set in the September 19, 2011 Order, plaintiffs' Consolidated Amended Complaint is due to be filed on October 24, 2011. Defendants intend to file motions to dismiss asserting, among other things, that plaintiffs lack standing to pursue this action. In light of the current procedural posture, the parties respectfully believe that the ADR certification and selection process is premature at this time, particularly given that the operative complaint has not yet been filed and the exact identities of the parties is not yet known. The parties agree that private mediation at some point during the course of this litigation may be appropriate if the Court finds that plaintiffs have standing and that the yet to be filed operative complaint states a claim.

Respectfully submitted,

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Professional Corporation

Elizabeth C. Peterson

Attorneys for Defendants and Nominal

Defendant Google Inc.

Respectfully submitted,

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN

& DOWD LLP

DARREN J. ROBBINS

TRAVIS E. DOWNS III

BENNY C. GOODMAN III

ERIK W. LUEDEKE

Travis E. Downs III

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN

& DOWD LLP

SHAWN A. WILLIAMS

POMERANTZ HAUDEK GROSSMAN

& GROSS LLP

MARC I. GROSS

JEREMY A. LIEBERMAN

JASON S. COWART

FEI-LU QIAN

POMERANTZ HAUDEK GROSSMAN

& GROSS LLP

PATRICK V. DAHLSTROM

Lead Attorneys for Plaintiffs I, Elizabeth C. Peterson, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING ADR CERTIFICATION AND SELECTION PROCESS. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Travis E. Downs III has concurred in this filing.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton


Summaries of

In re Google, Inc. S'Holder Derivative Litig.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
Oct 25, 2011
Master File No. CV-11-04248-PJH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2011)
Case details for

In re Google, Inc. S'Holder Derivative Litig.

Case Details

Full title:In re GOOGLE INC. SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION This Document Relates…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

Date published: Oct 25, 2011

Citations

Master File No. CV-11-04248-PJH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2011)