Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02627/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02627-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:77 Securities Fraud

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEEVE EVELLARD, Individually and on

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION, RENAUD

LAPLANCHE, and CARRIE L. DOLAN,

Defendants. /

NICOLE WERTZ, Individually and on Behalf of All

Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

LENDINGCLUB CORPORATION, RENAUD

LAPLANCHE, and CARRIE L. DOLAN,

Defendants. /

No. C 16-02627 WHA

No. C 16-02670 WHA

ORDER APPROVING LEAD

PLAINTIFF’S SELECTION OF

COUNSEL

After an in camera conference at which statements from a representative of the City

Attorney’s office and of the Board of WPERP were taken under oath and supplemental sworn

declarations, the Court is persuaded that the selection of Robbins Geller was within the scope of

several reasonable choices and was not influenced by any pay-to-play considerations. 

Therefore, the selection of Robbins Geller as counsel for lead plaintiff is approved. By

DECEMBER 9 AT NOON, counsel shall file a consolidated complaint.

Case 3:16-cv-02627-WHA Document 113 Filed 10/28/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The Court appreciates the time and effort undertaken by the nine other firms that applied

to serve as counsel for lead plaintiff. In the course of preparing for the hearing, the Court

reviewed some of the submissions made by candidates for selection as counsel for lead plaintiff

and read with particularity the fee proposals, staffing proposals, and counsel’s track records. 

The Court did not read passages dealing with plans for prosecuting the case. If any party in this

action has any objection to the Court retaining this information, any objection must be made by

NOVEMBER 3 AT NOON.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 28, 2016. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:16-cv-02627-WHA Document 113 Filed 10/28/16 Page 2 of 2