Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05078/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05078-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE SAFEWAY TUNA CASES Case No. 15-cv-05078-EMC 

ORDER APPOINTING INTERIM 

CLASS COUNSEL

Docket Nos. 19, 38

I. INTRODUCTION

The instant putative class action is brought on behalf of purchasers of Safeway brand and 

Open Nature brand tuna (collectively Safeway Tuna). Docket No. 53 (Consolidated Complaint) 

(Compl.) at ¶ 1. Plaintiffs allege that the Safeway Tuna cans are underfilled and substantially 

underweight. Id.

The suit was originally filed as three separate suits: Soto v. Safeway, Inc., Shihad v. 

Safeway, Inc., and Shiner v. Safeway, Inc. On March 8, 2016, the parties stipulated to the 

consolidation of the cases. Docket No. 39. Plaintiff Soto now moves for the appointment of 

Bursor & Fisher, P.A. as interim counsel, while Plaintiff Shiner moves for the appointment of 

Finkelstein Thompson LLP as interim counsel. Docket Nos. 19, 38. These motions came on for 

hearing before the Court on April 7, 2016. For the reasons stated below, the Court will appoint 

Finkelstein Thompson as interim counsel.

II. DISCUSSION

The Ninth Circuit has held that a court has the inherent power to consolidate actions and 

appoint counsel to supervise and coordinate prosecution of a case. See Vincent v. Hughes Air W., 

Inc., 557 F.2d 759, 774 (9th Cir. 1977). Factors that courts typically consider in lead counsel 

Case 3:15-cv-05078-EMC Document 56 Filed 04/08/16 Page 1 of 4
2

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

determinations include: (1) the quality of the pleadings, (2) the vigorousness of the prosecution of 

the lawsuits, (3) the capabilities of counsel, including their experience and prior success record, 

and whether counsel‟s charges are reasonable, and (4) whether one complaint is simply a „copycat 

action‟ of another. See In re Oclaro, Inc. Derivative Litig., Case No. C-11-3176 EMC, 2011 U.S. 

Dist. LEXIS 103967, at *6-7 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2011).

The Court finds that appointment of interim class counsel is warranted to avoid duplication 

of work, and appoints Finkelstein Thompson as interim counsel. First, the quality of pleadings 

somewhat favors Finkelstein Thompson, as the Shiner complaint identified the Vons corporation 

as a defendant while the Soto complaint did not, although Vons stores use a number of Safeway 

brands and advertising campaigns (including the Open Nature brand). See Case No. 16-cv-318-

EMC, Docket No. 1 (Shiner Compl.). The original Soto complaint also did not identify the “Open 

Nature brand” (which is Safeway‟s own brand, and allegedly replaced the Safeway brand after it 

was discontinued). See id. at ¶ 31. While Bursor & Fisher state that they were aware of this 

information, they offer no explanation for why they failed to include it in their initial complaint. 

See Docket No. 35-1 (Supp. Fisher Dec.) at ¶ 3.

Second, the vigorousness of prosecution is neutral, given the early posture of this case. 

Both firms have conducted similar pre-trial investigations, including contacting the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to conduct standard of fill tests. See Docket 

No. 19-1 (Fisher Dec.) at ¶¶ 12-13; Docket No. 38 (Rivas Dec.) at ¶ 13.

Third, the capabilities of counsel favors Finkelstein Thompson. While both counsel have 

experience in food labeling class actions, the Court has some concerns regarding Bursor & 

Fisher‟s actions in the Hendricks v. StarKist Co. class action, Case No. 13-cv-729-HSG, as well as 

Bursor & Fisher‟s assertions that they successfully resolved the Hendricks case even though final 

approval of the class action settlement was denied. Finkelstein Thompson, on the other hand, has 

been appointed to the Steering Committee in In re Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” MDL, Case No. 

15-MD-2672-CRB (JSC), having been selected in a highly competitive process. Rivas Dec. at ¶ 

11.

Finally, the factor of whether one complaint may be a “copycat action” favors Bursor & 

Case 3:15-cv-05078-EMC Document 56 Filed 04/08/16 Page 2 of 4
3

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

Fisher. Finkelstein Thompson did not start investigating the claim until early December 2015, 

after the Soto complaint was filed in November 2015, and the complaints are relatively similar. 

See Rivas Dec. at ¶ 13. 

The weight of the factors favors Finkelstein Thompson as interim class counsel. As 

interim class counsel, Finkelstein Thompson shall have the sole authority to:

a. Determine and present (in briefs, oral argument, or such other fashion as 

may be appropriate, personally or by a designee) to the Court and opposing 

parties the positions of plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action on all matters 

arising during proceedings;

b. Coordinate and conduct discovery on behalf of plaintiffs in the 

Consolidated action consistent with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 

26(b)(1), 26(b)(2) and 26(g), including any discovery and scheduling orders 

that the Court may issue, including the preparation of joint interrogatories 

and requests for production of documents and the examination of witnesses 

in depositions;

c. Coordinate the selection and preparation of expert witnesses for the 

plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action;

d. Conduct settlement negotiations on behalf of plaintiffs in the Consolidated 

Action;

e. Delegate specific tasks to other counsel as necessary to ensure that pretrial 

preparation for the plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action is conducted 

efficiently and effectively;

f. Enter into stipulations with opposing counsel as necessary for the conduct 

of the Consolidated Action;

g. Perform such other duties as may be incidental to proper coordination of 

Plaintiffs‟ activities or authorized by further order of the Court.

In making this appointment, the Court reiterates its view that this case should not require work by 

multiple law firms except in exceptional circumstances on discrete issues, where, e.g., another 

Case 3:15-cv-05078-EMC Document 56 Filed 04/08/16 Page 3 of 4
4

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

firm has unique knowledge on a particular matter, and that Finkelstein Thompson will be charged 

with ensuring that costs and expenses – including attorney‟s fees – will be properly managed, and 

that duplication of work will be kept to a minimum. There is no need for an executive committee 

or co-counsel. 

III. CONCLUSION

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Shiner‟s motion to appoint Finkelstein Thompson as sole

interim counsel and DENIES Plaintiff Soto‟s motion to appoint Bursor & Fisher as interim 

counsel.

This order disposes of Docket Nos. 19 and 38.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 8, 2016

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-05078-EMC Document 56 Filed 04/08/16 Page 4 of 4