) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants, ) Nominal Defendant.

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Chief Judge Wiley Y. Daniel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MARY LOU BENNEK, Derivatively on ) Behalf of THE HOME DEPOT, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Case 2:16-cv JAD-VCF Document 29 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 4:12-cv O Document 184 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID 4824

Case: 5:17-cv SL Doc #: 22 Filed: 12/01/17 1 of 9. PageID #: 1107 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case3:12-cv SI Document11 Filed07/13/12 Page1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. reasons set forth below, the Court will deny the motion.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

"'031 Patent"), and alleging claims of copyright infringement. (Compl. at 5).^ Plaintiff filed its

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ORDER

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 19 Filed: 06/13/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:901

Case 3:08-cv MHP Document 41 Filed 04/15/2009 Page 1 of 8

Case4:12-cv PJH Document22-2 Filed07/23/12 Page1 of 8. Exhibit B

United States District Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON. Plaintiff,

Motion to Compel ( Defendant s Motion ) and Plaintiff Joseph Lee Gay s ( Plaintiff ) Motion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

ORDER RELATING CASE AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND APPOINT INTERIM COUNSEL

Case 4:18-cv HSG Document 38 Filed 07/23/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 1:17-cv CAB Doc #: 24 Filed: 02/02/18 1 of 6. PageID #: <pageid> UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:09-cv SC-MHD Document 505 Filed 04/11/14 Page 1 of 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

USDC IN/ND case 2:18-cv JVB-JEM document 1 filed 04/26/18 page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv JCG Document 117 Filed 09/12/17 Page 1 of 8. Slip Op UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

J S - 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. CASE NO. CV JST (FMOx) GLOBAL DÉCOR, INC. and THOMAS H. WOLF.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Case 1:10-cv ER-SRF Document 824 Filed 07/10/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE HONORABLE DAVID O. CARTER, JUDGE PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTION TO REMAND [19]

Case: 1:16-cv CAB Doc #: 25 Filed: 07/25/17 1 of 7. PageID #: 253 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 2:13-cv KAM-AKT Document 124 Filed 10/19/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 2044

Case 2:11-cv FMO-SS Document 256 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:11349

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:08-cv MOC-DSC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:11-cv JPO Document 38 Filed 02/06/12 Page 1 of 9. claim to have suffered damages in connection with purchases of Agnico-Eagle Mines Ltd.

CASE 0:11-cv PJS-TNL Document 125 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case3:15-cv VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8

Case5:11-cv EJD Document133 Filed11/20/13 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:14-cv VAB Document 62 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

Case 2:08-cv SHM-dkv Document 47 Filed 10/08/2008 Page 1 of 13

Case 1:12-cv WJM-KMT Document 64 Filed 09/05/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,

Case 2:15-cv WHW-CLW Document 156 Filed 01/18/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 3857

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Case 3:15-cv BTM-BLM Document 6 Filed 02/16/16 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:10-cv RLH -PAL Document 27 Filed 12/01/10 Page 1 of 9

Marks v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Commercial Financial Services, Incorporated et al Doc. 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ORDER I. INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs, Defendants.

Case 2:17-cv RSM Document 27 Filed 03/29/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE I.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:13-cv LGS Document 20 Filed 06/26/13 Page 1 of 8. : Plaintiffs, : : : Defendants. :

1. This case arises out of a dispute related to the sale of Plaintiff David Post s

Case 4:18-cv O Document 74 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID 879

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,

United States District Court Central District of California

Case 2:17-cv NGE-RSW ECF No. 53 filed 12/10/18 PageID.739 Page 1 of 17

Case3:13-cv SI Document39 Filed11/18/13 Page1 of 8

Case 3:10-cv HTW-MTP Document 127 Filed 12/06/16 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:13-cv LDD Document 23 Filed 08/14/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

USDCSDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC#: DATE FILED~;AUG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 95 Filed: 12/20/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:328

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Manier et al v. Medtech Products, Inc. et al Doc. 22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION. Plaintiffs, No. 3:16-cv-02086

United States District Court

2:12-cv NGE-MJH Doc # 99 Filed 12/03/13 Pg 1 of 8 Pg ID 4401 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

United States District Court Central District of California

Case 3:17-cv WHO Document 83 Filed 01/30/18 Page 1 of 14

Case 2:11-cv SHL-cgc Document 908 Filed 07/31/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID 11476

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Plaintiff United States of America ( plaintiff ) commenced this action seeking payment for the indebtedness of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant.

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 138 Filed: 03/31/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:2059

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 3:17-cv HZ Document 24 Filed 08/14/18 Page 1 of 10

*\» IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM INTRODUCTION. This matter is before the Honorable Anita A. Sukola on Defendant Stephen Tebo's

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 4:11-cv RAS Document 37 Filed 06/16/11 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

Case 1:15-mc JGK Document 26 Filed 05/11/15 Page 1 of 10

Case: 1:16-cv CAB Doc #: 26 Filed: 11/14/17 1 of 7. PageID #: 316 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 0:12-cv WJZ Document 215 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/06/2013 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:05-cv RHB Document 50 Filed 10/06/2005 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:16-cv MGC Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/21/2016 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Aleph Towers, LLC et al v. Ambit Texas, LLC et al Doc. 128

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-gpc-ksc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 ANDREW CALCATERRA, derivatively on behalf of BOFI HOLDING, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA and BOFI HOLDING, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, vs. GREGORY GARRABRANTS, et al., Defendants, Nominal Defendant. [Caption continues on following page.] Case No. cv GPC (KSC ORDER: GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND APPROVE SELECTION OF LEAD COUNSEL DENYING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS DENYING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS [ECF Nos.,, ] cv GPC (KSC

Case :-cv-0-gpc-ksc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 ZHANG YONG, derivatively on behalf of BOFI HOLDING, INC., and BOFI HOLDING, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, vs. GREGORY GARRABRANTS, et al., Defendants, Nominal Defendant. LABORERS PENSION TRUST FUND OF NORTHERN NEVADA, derivatively on behalf of BOFI HOLDING, INC., and BOFI HOLDING, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, vs. GREGORY GARRABRANTS, et al., Defendants, Nominal Defendant. Case No. cv0 GPC (KSC Case No. cv0 GPC (KSC cv GPC (KSC

Case :-cv-0-gpc-ksc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 Before the Court is Plaintiffs Andrew Calcaterra, Zhang Yong, and Laborers Pension Trust Fund of Northern Nevada s ( Plaintiffs motion to consolidate the three cases above, to appoint a lead plaintiff, and to approve of selection of lead counsel. Pl. Mot., Calcaterra v. Garrabrants, No. :-cv-0-gpc-ksc, ECF No.. The motion is not opposed by Defendants. ECF No. 0. I. Consolidation Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule (a states that [i]f actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may: ( join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions; ( consolidate the actions; or ( issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay. To determine whether to consolidate, a court weighs the interest of judicial convenience against the potential for delay, confusion and prejudice caused by consolidation. In re Oreck Corp. Halo Vacuum & Air Purifiers Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., F.R.D., 0 (C.D. Cal. 0 (citing Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Triple A Mach. Shop, Inc., 0 F. Supp. 0, 0 (N.D. Cal. ; Huene v. United States, F.d 0, 0, on reh g, F.d 0 (th Cir.. A district court has broad discretion in determining whether or not to consolidate actions. See id.; see also Zhu v. UCBH Holdings, Inc., F. Supp. d 0, 0 (N.D. Cal. 00 (citing Southwest Marine, 0 F. Supp. at 0 0. Upon review of the moving papers, the record, and the applicable law, the Court GRANTS parties joint motions to consolidate. Review of the operative complaints show that these cases are shareholder derivative actions brought by respective Plaintiffs against the same Defendants, concerning the same alleged breaches of fiduciary duty committed by Defendants in relation to BofI Federal Bank s banking activities across the same time period, with substantially similar factual allegations, causes of action, and requested relief. Compare Calcaterra Compl., No. :-cv-0-gpc-ksc, ECF No., with Yong Compl., No. :-cv- cv GPC (KSC

Case :-cv-0-gpc-ksc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 00-GPC-KSC, ECF No., and Laborers Compl., No. :-cv-00-gpc-ksc, ECF No.. II. Approval of Selection of Lead Counsel Appointment of lead counsel in consolidated actions is particularly warranted because it permits efficient utilization of the Court s and parties resources and helps eliminate any duplication. See, e.g., MacAlister v. Guterma, F.d, (d Cir. ( The benefits achieved by consolidation and the appointment of general counsel, i.e., elimination of duplication and repetition and in effect the creation of a coordinator of diffuse plaintiffs through whom motions and discovery proceedings will be channeled, will most certainly redound to the benefit of all parties to the litigation. ; Dollens v. Zionts, Nos. 0 C et al., 00 U.S. Dist. LEXIS, at * (N.D. Ill. Dec., 00 (granting plaintiffs motion to consolidate and appointing co-lead plaintiffs as well as colead and liaison counsel; see also Sparano v. Lief, No. 0CV0 BTM BLM, 0 WL 00, at * (S.D. Cal. Mar., 0. The decision to establish a leadership structure is within the broad discretion of the trial court. See Manual for Complex Litigation (Fourth 0. (0. Plaintiffs ask the Court to approve their selection of Bottini & Bottini, Inc. as lead counsel. It appears that Bottini & Bottini has substantial experience litigating shareholder derivative actions and has obtained substantial recoveries for a number of clients in such actions. See Bottini Decl., Ex. D, ECF No. -. In light of the firm s substantial experience in shareholder derivative actions, the Court APPROVES Plaintiffs choice of counsel and APPOINTS Bottini & Bottini, Inc. as Lead Counsel. CONCLUSION Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (a(, the Court hereby consolidates the above-captioned actions for all purposes under the low numbered cv GPC (KSC

Case :-cv-0-gpc-ksc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 case, Case No. :-CV-0-GPC-KSC, and orders that the caption of the action be amended as follows: IN RE: BofI HOLDING, INC. SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION Case No. :-CV-0-GPC-KSC Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel. The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs motion for approval of selection of lead counsel. The Court APPOINTS Bottini & Bottini as Lead Counsel in the consolidated action.. No defendant shall be required to answer, move against or otherwise respond to the original Complaint filed in any of the above-captioned actions, except as set forth below.. Within fourteen ( days after the entry of this Order, counsel for the plaintiffs and counsel for the defendants shall meet and confer regarding proposals for (a the time for plaintiffs to file a consolidated amended complaint or provide notice of plaintiffs intent to rely upon the original Complaint in Case No. :-CV- 0-GPC-KSC [ECF No. ] (the operative complaint ; (b the time for defendants to respond to the operative complaint; and (c a schedule for briefing any motion to dismiss that may be filed by a defendant. Parties are directed to submit their proposed schedule to the Court within seven ( days following the meet and confer.. Defendants motion to dismiss, ECF No., and Plaintiff Calcaterra s ex parte motion to strike Defendants motion to dismiss, ECF No., are DENIED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. cv GPC (KSC

Case :-cv-0-gpc-ksc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 Dated: June, 0 cv GPC (KSC