Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04997/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04997-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 

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 

Robert S. Green (State Bar No. 136183) 

Jenelle Welling (State Bar No. 209480) 

Brian S. Umpierre (State Bar No. 236399) 

GREEN WELLING LLP

595 Market Street, Suite 2750 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Telephone: (415) 477-6700 

Facsimile: (415) 477-6710 

cand.uscourts@classcounsel.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Chernomorets

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

VLADIMIR CHERNOMORETS, 

individually and on behalf of all others 

similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

RAMBUS, INC, a corporation, and Does 1 

through 100. 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C 06-4852 WHA 

STIPULATION AND 

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES FOR 

ALL PURPOSES, APPOINTING LEAD 

COUNSEL, AND SETTING SCHEDULE 

FOR FILING OF CONSOLIDATED 

COMPLAINT AND RESPONSES 

THERETO 

SEBASTIAN GRANDE, individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

RAMBUS, INC, a corporation, and Does 1 

through 100. 

 Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C 06-4853 RMW 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 1 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 1

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

SHAWN SELEY, individually and on behalf 

of all others similarly situated, 

 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

RAMBUS, INC, a corporation, and Does 1 

through 100. 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C 06-4987 PVT 

GREGORY ALVAREZ, individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

RAMBUS, INC, a corporation, and Does 1 

through 100. 

 Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C 06-4997 RS 

JASON WINDER, individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

RAMBUS, INC, a corporation, and Does 1 

through 100. 

 Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. C 06-5455 RS 

 WHEREAS, there are presently five related antitrust actions on behalf of consumers of 

assorted types of DRAM technology against defendant Rambus, Inc. (“Rambus”) pending 

before this Court: 

Abbreviated Case Name Case Number Date Filed

 Chernomorets v. Rambus C 06 4852 WHA 08/10/06 

 Grande v. Rambus C 06 4853 RMW 08/10/06 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 2 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 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

 Seley v. Rambus C 06 4987 PVT 08/17/06 

 Alvarez v. Rambus C 06 4997 RS 08/18/06 

Winder v. Rambus C 06 5455 RS 09/06/06 

 WHEREAS, the five Rambus antitrust actions arise out of the same transactions and 

occurrences and involve the same or substantially similar issues of law and fact, and, 

therefore, are related within the meaning of Civil L.R. 3-12 and should be consolidated for all 

purposes under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a); 

WHEREAS, on August 22, 2006, United States District Judge Ronald M. Whyte, 

pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-12 entered a Related Case Order in Grande v. Rambus, Inc., No. C 

06-4853 RS, designating that action as related to an earlier filed action assigned to Judge 

Whyte, Hynix Semiconductor v. Rambus, Inc., C 00-20905 RMW, and ordering that action to 

be reassigned to him. 

 WHEREAS, defendant takes no position as to the appointment of Lead Counsel; and 

 WHEREAS, plaintiffs and defendant, after meeting and conferring, agree that judicial 

economy will be served by setting a schedule for defendant’s response to the complaint. 

 THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by plaintiffs and defendant, 

through their respective counsel of record, as follows: 

I. CONSOLIDATION OF ACTIONS 

1. The following related actions are hereby reassigned to United States District 

Judge Ronald M. Whyte and consolidated into Civil Action No. C 06-4852 RMW for all 

purposes, including pretrial proceedings, trial and appeal: 

Abbreviated Case Name Case Number Date Filed

 Chernomorets v. Rambus C 06 4852 JCS 08/10/06 

 Grande v. Rambus C 06 04853 RS 08/10/06 

 Seley v. Rambus C 06 04987 PVT 08/17/06 

 Alvarez v. Rambus C 06 4997 RS 08/18/06 

 Winder v. Rambus C 06 5455 RS 09/06/06 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 3 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 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

2. All related actions that are now pending, subsequently filed in, or transferred 

to, this District shall be consolidated into this action for pretrial purposes. This Order shall 

apply to every such related action, absent order of the Court. A party that objects to such 

consolidation, or to any other provision of this Order, must file an application for relief from 

this Order within thirty (30) days after the date on which a copy of the order is mailed to the 

party’s counsel, pursuant to Paragraph 10, infra. 

3. This Order is entered without prejudice to the rights of any party to apply for 

severance of any claim or action, for good cause shown. 

4. The docket in Civil Action No. C 06-4852 RMW shall constitute the Master 

Docket for this action. 

5. The caption of these consolidated actions shall be “In re Rambus Antitrust 

Litigation” and every pleading filed in the consolidated actions, or in any separate action 

included herein, shall bear the following caption: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

IN RE RAMBUS ) Case No. C 06-4852 RMW 

ANTITRUST LITIGATION ) 

 ) 

This Document Relates To: ) 

 ) 

 ) 

_____________________________ ) 

6. The file in Civil Action No. C 06 4852 RMW shall constitute a Master File for 

every action in the consolidated action. When a pleading is intended to be applicable to all 

actions governed by this Order, the words "All Actions" shall appear immediately after the 

words "This Document Relates To:" in the caption set out above. When a pleading is 

intended to be applicable to only some, but not all, of the consolidated actions, this Court’s 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 4 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 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

docket number for each individual action to which the pleading is intended to be applicable 

and the abbreviated case name of said action shall appear immediately after the words "This 

Document Relates To:" in the caption described above (e.g., "No. C 06-4852 RMW, 

Chernomorets v. Rambus"). 

7. A Master Docket and a Master File hereby are established for the above 

consolidated proceedings and for all other related cases filed in or transferred to this Court. 

Separate dockets shall continue to be maintained for each of the individual actions hereby 

consolidated, and entries shall be made in the docket of each individual case in accordance 

with the regular procedures of the clerk of this Court, except as modified by this Order. 

8. When a pleading is filed and the caption shows that it is applicable to "All 

Actions," the clerk shall file such pleading in the Master File and note such filing on the 

Master Docket. No further copies need be filed, and no other docket entries need be made. 

9. When a pleading is filed and the caption shows that it is to be applicable to 

fewer than all of the consolidated actions, the clerk will file such pleading in the Master File 

only but shall docket such filing on the Master Docket and the docket of each applicable 

action. 

10. When a case which properly belongs as part of the In re Rambus Antitrust 

Litigation is filed in this Court or transferred to this Court from another court and assigned to 

this Court, the clerk of this Court shall: 

a) Place a copy of this Order in the separate file for such action; 

b) Mail to the attorneys for the plaintiff(s) in the newly-filed or transferred 

case a copy of this Order; 

c) Direct that this Order be served upon or mailed to any new defendant(s) or 

their counsel in the newly-filed or transferred case; and 

d) Make an appropriate entry on the Master Docket. 

11. This Court requests the assistance of counsel in calling to the attention of the 

clerk of this Court the filing or transfer of any case which properly might be consolidated as 

part of In re Rambus Antitrust Litigation. 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 5 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 5

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

II. APPOINTMENT OF CO-LEAD COUNSEL; LIAISON COUNSEL; AND 

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 

12. The law firms of Finkelstein Thompson & Loughran, Lovell Stewart Halebian 

LLP, and Green Welling LLP shall be appointed Lead Counsel for plaintiffs in the 

consolidated Rambus antitrust actions.1 

13. The law firm of Green Welling LLP shall be designated Liaison Counsel. 

14. Lead Counsel and the law firms of Chimicles & Tikellis LLP, and Miller 

Faucher and Cafferty LLP, shall form the Executive Committee which shall be consulted by 

Lead Counsel for significant decisions and for completing the necessary work in this case. 

15. Lead Counsel shall have authority to speak for plaintiffs in matters regarding 

pretrial and trial procedure and settlement negotiations, and shall make all work assignments 

in such manner as to facilitate the orderly and efficient prosecution of this litigation and to 

avoid duplicative or unproductive effort. 

16. Lead Counsel shall be responsible for coordination of all activities and 

appearances on behalf of plaintiffs and for the dissemination of notices and orders of this 

Court. No motion, request for discovery or other pretrial proceedings shall be initiated or 

filed by plaintiffs except through Lead Counsel. 

17. Notwithstanding the above, any communications by the court or any party to 

plaintiffs in this action are effectively made upon all plaintiffs if delivered to Liaison Counsel. 

Liaison Counsel also shall be available and responsible for communications to and from this 

Court. Lead Counsel shall be responsible for the creation and maintenance of a master 

service list of all parties and their respective counsel. 

18. Defendant’s counsel may rely upon all agreements made with Lead Counsel, 

or other duly authorized representatives of plaintiffs, and such agreements shall be binding on 

plaintiffs. 

 

1

 Defendant takes no position as to the appointment of the Lead Counsel, Liaison 

Counsel, or Executive Committee. 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 6 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 6

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

III. SCHEDULE

19. Plaintiffs shall no later than 75 days from the entry of this Order file and serve 

a Consolidated Complaint which will supersede all existing complaints filed in these actions. 

Defendant need not respond to any of the pre-existing complaints. Service shall be effected 

with respect to any defendant named in any of the consolidated actions by serving the 

Consolidated Complaint on that defendant or, with permission, that defendant's counsel. 

20. Defendant shall answer or otherwise respond to the Consolidated 

Complaint no later than 75 days from the date of service. In the event that defendant files and 

serves any motion directed at the Consolidated Complaint, plaintiffs shall file and serve their 

opposition within 60 days after the service of defendants' motion. If defendant files and 

serves a reply to plaintiffs' opposition, it will do so within 30 days after service of the 

opposition. 

21. This schedule is entered without prejudice to the rights of any party to apply 

for modification, for good cause shown. 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: September 20, 2006 GREEN WELLING LLP

 

By: /s/ 

 Robert S. Green 

 Jenelle Welling 

 Brian S. Umpierre 

 595 Market Street, Suite 2750 

 San Francisco, CA 94105 

 Telephone: (415) 477-6700 

 Facsimile: (415) 477-6710 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff Chernomorets 

I, Robert S. Green, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file 

this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER. In compliance with General Order 45, 

X.B., I hereby attest that the other signators listed have concurred in this filing.

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 7 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 7

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

DATED: September 20, 2006 FINKELSTEIN THOMPSON & 

LOUGHRAN 

 By: /s/ 

 Christine Pedigo Bartholomew 

 601 Montgomery St., Suite 665 

 San Francisco, CA 94111 

 Telephone: (415) 398-8700 

 Facsimile: (415) 398-8704 

 Douglas G. Thompson, Jr. 

 L. Kendall Satterfield 

 Mila F. Bartos 

 FINKELSTEIN THOMPSON & LOUGHRAN 

 1050 30th Street 

 Washington, D.C. 20007 

 Attorneys for Sebastian Grande 

DATED: September 20, 2006 LOVELL STEWART HALEBIAN LLP 

 By: /s/ 

 Merrick S. Rayle 

Christopher Lovell 

212 Wood St. 

 Pacific Grove, CA 93950 

 Telephone: (831) 333-0309 

 Facsimile: (831) 333-0325 

Attorneys for Shawn Seley 

DATED: September 20, 2006 CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 

 By: /s/ 

 James R. Malone, Jr. 

 Michael D. Gottsch 

Joseph G. Saunder 

 Benjamin F. Johns 

 361 West Lancaster Avenue 

 Haverford, PA 19041 

 Telephone: (610) 642-8500 

 Attorneys for Gregory Alverez 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 8 of 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES 

Case No. C 06-4852 8

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

DATED: September 20, 2006 KEMNITZER ANDERSON BARRON & 

 OGILVIE LLP 

 By: /s/ 

 Andrew J. Olgilvie 

 445 Bush Street 

 San Francisco, CA 94108 

 Telephone: (415) 861-2265 

Attorneys for Gregory Alvarez and Jason Winder 

DATED: September 20, 2006 MILLER FAUCHER AND CAFFERTY LLP 

 

 By: /s/ 

 Patrick E. Cafferty 

 101 North Main Street, Suite 450 

 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 

 Telephone: (734) 769-2144 

Attorneys for Jason Winder 

DATED: September 20, 2006 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

 By: /s/ 

 Maura L. Rees 

Anthony Weibell 

650 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, California 94304-1050 

Telephone: (650) 493-9300 

Facsimile: (650) 493-6811 

Attorneys for Defendant Rambus Inc. 

O R D E R 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: ____________________ ____________________________________ 

 THE HONORABLE RONALD M.WHYTE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

Case 5:06-cv-04997-RMW Document 7 Filed 10/18/06 Page 9 of 9