EXHIBIT D 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 1 of 31 PageID #:3815
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., 

CONSUMER PRIVACY

LITIGATION

This Document Relates to All Cases 

MDL No. 2948 

Master Docket No. 20-cv-4699 

Judge John Z. Lee

Magistrate Judge Sunil R. Harjani 

DECLARATION OF ALBERT Y. CHANG IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ PETITION 

FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES FILED ON BEHALF OF 

BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC. 

 I, Albert Y. Chang, declare and state as follows: 

1. I am a shareholder of the law firm of Bottini & Bottini, Inc. My firm’s resume is 

attached hereto as Exhibit 1. I submit this Declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ petition for an 

award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses in connection with services 

rendered and expenses incurred by my firm in connection with this litigation. 

2. My firm has acted as counsel to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ classes in this action. 

During the period from case inception through October 31, 2020 (the first reporting period 

pursuant to the Court’s Case Management Order No. 4: Common Benefit Fee and Expense 

Protocol [Dkt. 105], my firm conducted the following activities for the common benefit of 

Plaintiffs: investigating the underlying facts, conducting legal research, advising potential class 

members, reviewing and analyzing defendants’ disclosures and public filings, consulting with 

experts, coordinating with other counsel, and drafting pleadings, motions, and other documents. 

The total number of hours expended on this litigation by my firm from case inception through 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 2 of 31 PageID #:3816
2 

October 31, 2020, is 466.10 hours. The total lodestar for my firm in this time period is 

$327,744.50. 

3. For the time period November 1, 2020 through February 28, 2022, and at the 

request of Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel, my firm conducted the following activities for the common 

benefit of Plaintiffs: drafting pleadings, motions, internal memoranda, and other documents, 

attending motion hearings and conferences, participating in settlement discussions, reviewing 

settlement papers, reviewing objections and motions relating to the settlement, advising plaintiffs 

and conferring with co-counsel. The total number of hours expended on this litigation by my firm 

from for the time period November 1, 2020 through February 28, 2022, is 192.00 hours. The total 

lodestar for my firm in this time period is $140,147.00. 

4. The total number of hours expended on this litigation by my firm from case 

inception through February 28, 2022, is 658.10 hours. The total lodestar for my firm is 

$467,891.50. My firm’s lodestar figures are based on the firm’s current hourly billing rates. The 

hourly rates for the partners, attorneys and professional support staff in my firm are the same as 

the usual and customary hourly rates charged for their services in contingent billable matters. The 

total number of hours was determined by the examination of contemporaneous, daily time records 

regularly prepared and maintained by my firm and which have been provided to Co-Lead Counsel 

for their review. 

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a detailed summary indicating the amount of time 

spent by the partners, attorneys and other professional support staff of my firm who have been 

involved in this litigation, and the lodestar calculation is based on my firm’s current hourly billing 

rates from case inception through February 28, 2022. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 3 of 31 PageID #:3817
Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 4 of 31 PageID #:3818
Exhibit 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 5 of 31 PageID #:3819
BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC. 

7817 IVANHOE AVENUE ● SUITE 102 ● LA JOLLA, CA 92037 

www.bottinilaw.com ● Tel: 858.914.2001 ● Fax: 858.914.2002

FIRM RESUME 

Bottini & Bottini, Inc. specializes in representing shareholders, consumers, businesses 

and whistleblowers in high-stakes cases across the United States. The firm concentrates 

its practice in complex civil litigation, including the areas of securities class actions, 

shareholder derivative litigation, consumer privacy class action lawsuits, antitrust class 

action litigation, shareholder mergers and acquisitions litigation, qui tam litigation on 

behalf of whistleblowers under the False Claims Act, and class actions under the 

Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). 

The attorneys at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. have been appointed lead counsel, co-lead counsel, 

or played a significant role in hundreds of high-profile cases in state and federal courts 

across the country. The firm’s representative matters and the biographies of the firm’s 

professionals are set forth below. 

Representative Matters 

x In re Alphabet Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litig., Lead Case No. 19CV341522 

(Santa Clara Superior Court). Bottini & Bottini was appointed Co-Lead Counsel 

by the Hon. Brian C. Walsh after a heavily-contested lead counsel process. A 

groundbreaking settlement was reached in 2020 which resulted in Google’s 

commitment to eliminate the use of mandatory arbitration in cases alleging 

sexual harassment and discrimination, the establishment of a Diversity, Equity, 

& Inclusion Council including two members selected by Plaintiffs’ counsel, and 

an agreement by Google to spend $310 million over ten years on workplace 

initiatives designed to eliminate sexual harassment and discrimination and 

initiatives that support diversity, equity, and inclusion. See “Alphabet Settles 

Shareholder Suits Over Sexual Harassment Claims,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, 

Sept. 25, 2020. The membership of the DEI Council will consist of both 

external experts and internal members, including, in its first year, Alphabet’s 

CEO (Sundar Pichai). The workplace initiatives and programs will focus on (1) 

expanding the pool of historically underrepresented technologists; (2) hiring, 

progression, and retention of historically underrepresented talent at Alphabet 

and, in particular, Google; (3) fostering respectful, equitable, and inclusive 

workplace cultures; and (4) helping historically underrepresented groups and 

individuals succeed with their businesses and in the digital economy and tech 

industry. 

x In re Yahoo! Inc. Shareholder Litig., Lead Case No. 17-CV-307054 (Superior 

Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara). Bottini & Bottini was 

Co-Lead Counsel in this shareholder derivative litigation, which involved the 

largest corporate data breach in U.S. history. After engaging in expedited 

discovery, the Court granted in part Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary 

injunction and ordered Yahoo! to provide additional information to the 

Company’s shareholders in a proxy statement filed with the SEC. Thereafter, 

after further substantial litigation, the derivative claims settled for a cash 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 6 of 31 PageID #:3820
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 2 

f 

payment by Defendants of $29 million, representing the largest recovery ever 

in a shareholder derivative action involving a data breach. 

By order dated January 4, 2019, Judge Brian C. Walsh of the Complex 

Litigation Department granted final approval to the settlement stating: “But I 

have to say that on both sides, the intelligence, the persistence, the 

professionalism was a joy to behold. You're a credit to your clients and I hope 

they appreciate the fine work you did for them, and a credit to your profession. 

It was a pleasure to work with you.” 

The Yahoo shareholder derivative litigation has been described as a “milestone” 

by commentators for the significant cash recovery obtained for Yahoo, 

especially since past shareholder derivative cases involving data breaches had 

all been dismissed or not resulted in any cash recovery for the company. In 

describing the significant $29 million cash recovery in Yahoo, one 

commentator stated that “the track record in prior data breach related 

derivative litigation makes the significant recovery in the Yahoo data breachrelated derivative settlement all the more noteworthy.” See Kevin LaCroix, The 

D&O Diary, Jan. 21, 2019. 

● In re Tik Tok, Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation, MDL No. 2948 (N.D. Ill.) – 

In 2020, Bottini & Bottini was appointed to Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee by 

the Hon. John Z. Lee in this consumer privacy class action. Plaintiffs filed a 

Consolidated Amended Complaint on December 18, 2020. The complaint 

alleges that Defendants, through the TikTok app, collected, captured, obtained, 

stored and disclosed Illinois resident TikTok users’ biometric information in 

violation of the Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), 740 ILCS 

§14/1, et seq. In 2021, the case was settled for $92 million. By Order dated 

October 1, 2021, the Court granted preliminary approval to the settlement. A 

final fairness hearing is schedule for May 18, 2022. 

● In re Zoom Video Commc’ns, Inc. Privacy Litig., Master File No. 20-CV-02155 

(N.D. Cal.) (Koh, J.) -- Bottini & Bottini was appointed as a member of 

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee by Order dated June 30, 2020. The case is 

currently in the discovery phase. By Order dated March 11, 2021, Judge Koh 

denied in substantial part Defendants’ motion to dismiss. By Order dated April 

5, 2021, Judge Koh denied Zoom’s motion to stay discovery. The case was 

settled in 2021 for $85 million. By Order dated October 21, 2021, Judge Koh 

granted preliminary approval to the settlement. 

x Gehrich v. Frederick Howe et al. (In re MedImpact Shareholder Litig.), Case 

No. 37-2018-00041295-CU-SL-CTL (San Diego Superior Court). Bottini & 

Bottini served as sole court-appointed Lead Counsel in this shareholder class 

action against the officers and directors of MedImpact Holdings, Inc., the 

largest privately-owned pharmacy benefit manager in the United States. After 

prevailing on a demurrer in which the Court upheld all the claims alleged by 

the Plaintiffs, and after extensive litigation and motion practice in the case, 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 7 of 31 PageID #:3821
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 3 

f 

including discovery and the filing of three motions seeking declaratory and 

injunctive relief, the case was settled. As a result of Plaintiffs’ efforts, the price 

offered to the Company’s minority shareholders for their stock was increased 

by 75.12% (from $21.70 to $38.00), representing a recovery of over $41 million. 

During the case, the Company also agreed to hold annual meetings of 

shareholders and disseminate annual reports to shareholders. By order dated 

December 20, 2019, the Hon. Kenneth J. Medel granted final approval to the 

settlement and entered final judgment. 

x Wolther v. Maheshwari et al. (In re Veeco Instruments Shareholder Litig.), 

Lead Case No. 18CV329690 (Superior Court for the State of California, County 

of Santa Clara). Bottini & Bottini, Inc. is serving as Lead Counsel in this 

shareholder class action brought under the Securities Act of 1933. By Order 

dated May 3, 2019, the Hon. Brian Walsh denied defendants’ demurrers in their 

entirety. The case recently settled for $15 million -- approximately 17% of the 

estimated damages -- and is pending court approval. 

x In re Eventbrite, Inc. Securities Litigation, Lead Case No. 19CIV02798 

(Superior Court for the State of California, County of San Mateo). By Order 

dated June 25, 2019, Judge Weiner appointed Bottini & Bottini and Cotchett 

Pitre & McCarthy Lead Counsel in this securities class action brought under the 

Securities Act of 1933, which seeks damages relating to Eventbrite’s IPO. 

Bottini & Bottini successfully opposed Defendants’ motion to stay the case, 

which the Court denied by Order dated August 20, 2019. The case recently 

settled for $19.25 million -- approximately 27% of the estimated damages -- 

and is pending court approval. 

x Chicago Laborers Pension Fund v. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., Case No. 

CIV535692 (Superior Court for the State of California, County of San Mateo). 

Bottini & Bottini was one of three firms (together with Robbins Geller Rudman 

& Dowd LLP and Cotchett, Pitre, & McCarthy LLP) that prosecuted a class 

action under the Securities Act of 1933 against Alibaba Group Holding Limited 

(“Alibaba”) in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, arising 

from Alibaba’s September 2014 initial public offering (“IPO”). After three and 

a half years of hard-fought litigation that involved substantial discovery in both 

the United States and China, a cash settlement was reached in December 2018 

of $75,000,000 — approximately 23.4% of the estimated maximum damages. 

The settlement was granted final approval by the Hon. Richard H. DuBois on 

May 17, 2019. 

x In re Snap, Inc. Securities Cases, JCCP No. 4960 (Superior Court for the State 

of California, County of Los Angeles). Bottini & Bottini is serving as co-lead 

counsel in this shareholder class action relating to Snap’s IPO. In January 

2020, the case settled for $32,812,500. The Hon. Elihu M. Berle granted final 

approval of the settlement by Order dated March 9, 2021. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 8 of 31 PageID #:3822
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 4 

f 

x In re DRAM Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1486 (N.D. Cal.). Mr. Bottini’s 

prior firm, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, served as Co-Lead 

Counsel for the Class, and Mr. Bottini was one of two lead partners for his firm 

on the case. After five years of litigation, $325,997,000 in settlements was 

obtained for the Class from nine defendants in one of the largest and most 

complex civil antitrust class actions in the country. Mr. Bottini was involved in 

all aspects of the case from the filing of the first complaint in 2002 to the final 

approval of the settlements which occurred in August 2007. Mr. Bottini was 

part of the trial team that was set to try the case against the two remaining 

defendants – Mosel Vitelic, Inc. and Nanya – when separate settlements with 

these last two defendants were reached on March 21, 2007, the day before oral 

argument was to be conducted on the motions in limine for trial. On August 

15, 2007, the Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton granted final approval to the 

settlements, stating: 

I think I can conclude on the basis with my five years with you 

all, watching this litigation progress and seeing it wind to a 

conclusion, that the results are exceptional. The percentages, 

as you have outlined them, do put this [case] in one of the 

upper categories of results of this kind of [antitrust] class 

action. I am aware of the complexity . . . I thought that you all 

did an exceptionally good job of bringing to me only those 

matters that really required the Court's attention. You did an 

exceptionally good job at organizing and managing the case, 

assisting me in management of the case. There was excellent 

coordination between all the various different plaintiffs' 

counsel with your group and the other groups that are part of 

this litigation. . . . So my conclusion is the case was well 

litigated by both sides, well managed as well by both sides. 

x In re Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. Derivative Litigation, No. 

1:05cv41683 (Cal. Super. Ct., County of Santa Clara). Mr. Bottini was Co-Lead 

Counsel in one of the highest-profile cases in the country challenging the award 

of backdated stock options by executive officers of Brocade. The case was filed 

in May 2005 and, on August 8, 2008, Mr. Bottini was retained as co-counsel to 

Brocade by the Special Litigation Committee of the Board of Directors of 

Brocade to help litigate the company’s claims against ten former officers and 

directors of the company. An amended complaint was filed in federal court in 

San Francisco, and the case, In re Brocade Communications Systems, Inc., No. 

05-cv-2233 (N.D. Cal.), proceeded before the Honorable Charles R. Breyer in 

the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. After 

litigation of the case for over five years, over $24 million was recovered for 

Brocade through the litigation. 

x Hack v. Wright et al., Civil Action No. 4:14-CV-3442 (KPE) (United States 

District Court for the Southern District of Texas) (“In re Conns Inc. 

Shareholder Deriv. Litig.”). Bottini & Bottini serves as Lead Counsel in this 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 9 of 31 PageID #:3823
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 5 

f 

shareholder derivative litigation that was filed in 2014. By order dated July 22, 

2020, Judge Palermo denied defendants’ motion to dismiss with respect to 

Plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary duty claims. See Hack v. Wright, 2020 U.S. Dist. 

LEXIS 179979 (July 22, 2020). The case was fully litigated through discovery, 

and trial was set for Nov. 29, 2022. Plaintiffs settled the case prior to trial for 

$11 million. By Order dated Dec. 13, 2021, Judge Ellison granted preliminary 

approval of the settlement and set the final approval hearing for Feb. 17, 2022.

x In re Tintri, Inc. Securities Litigation, Lead Case No. 17-CIV-04321 (Superior 

Court for the State of California, County of San Mateo). Bottini & Bottini is 

Lead Counsel, along with Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, in this shareholder 

class action seeking damages relating to Tintri’s IPO. 

x Searles v. DeMartini et al. (“Capital Bank”), C.A. No. 2020-0136-KSJM (Del. 

Ch. Court). Bottini & Bottini served as Plaintiffs’ counsel, along with Bernstein 

Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, in this stockholder class action alleging 

aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duties related to the acquisition of 

Capital Bank Financial Corp. by First Horizon. Plaintiff alleged that Capital 

Bank’s largest outside investor, Crestview Advisors, LLC, and its Board 

designee, Defendant Richard M. DeMartini (“DeMartini”), had not only 

initiated the sales process without Board approval, but had conflicts of 

interests in quickly closing a deal. By Order dated Jan. 20, 2021, Vice 

Chancellor McCormick denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. After 

engaging in discovery, the case settled in 2021 for $23 million. 

x Houser v. CenturyLink, Inc., Case No. 2018CV30556 (District Court, Boulder 

County, Colorado). Bottini & Bottini is Lead Counsel in this shareholder class 

action brought under the Securities Act of 1933. 

x Kuehl v. ElectroCore, Inc., Docket No.: SOM-L-000876-19 (Superior Court of 

New Jersey, County of Somerset). Bottini & Bottini is serving as Lead Counsel 

in this shareholder class action brought under the Securities Act of 1933 

relating to ElectroCore’s IPO. 

x In re King Digital Entertainment plc Shareholder Litig., Case No. 

CGC15544770 (Superior Court for the State of California, County of San 

Francisco, Judge Curtis E.A. Karnow). Bottini & Bottini was a member of the 

Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in the case, which was litigated in the Superior 

Court for the State of California, County of San Francisco. The case was brought 

under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and alleged that the 

Registration Statement and Prospectus for the Company’s IPO were false and 

misleading. In 2016, the case settled for $18.5 million. The court granted final 

approval of the settlement by order dated June 9, 2017.

x In re Castlight Health Inc. Shareholder Litig., Case No. CIV533203 (Superior 

Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara). Bottini & Bottini was 

a member of the Executive Committee in this shareholder class action asserting 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 10 of 31 PageID #:3824
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 6 

f 

claims under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933. The complaint 

alleged that the Registration Statement and Prospectus for the Company’s 

March 14, 2014 IPO were false and misleading. The case settled for $9.50 

million. Judge Marie Seth Weiner, Chair of the Complex Litigation 

Department, approved the Settlement and entered Final Judgment on October 

28, 2016. 

x In re McKesson Corp. Stockholder Deriv. Litig., C.A. No. 2017-0736-SG (Del. 

Ch.). Bottini & Bottini served as one of the plaintiffs’ counsel in this 

shareholder derivative litigation for a cash payment of $175 million, as well as 

significant corporate governance reforms designed to address the complaint’s 

allegation that the Company had been damaged by regulatory fines and actions 

as a result of failure to properly comply with federal rules and regulations 

governing the sale of the company’s prescription opioid products. Specifically, 

Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that McKesson’s directors failed properly to 

implement a Controlled Substance Monitoring Program (CSMP), as required 

by a settlement with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA) in 2008. Plaintiffs’ Delaware action was 

coordinated with a related action pending in the Northern District of California. 

The settlement was approved and final judgment was entered on January 20, 

2020. 

x Plymouth County Retirement System v. Model N, Inc., Case No. CIV530291 

(Superior Court for the State of California, County of Santa Clara). Bottini & 

Bottini was one of three counsel for Plaintiffs in the case, which was brought in 

Santa Clara, California and alleged claims under Sections 11 and 12 of the 

Securities Act of 1933. The complaint alleged that the Registration Statement 

and Prospectus for the Company’s March 23, 2013 IPO were false and 

misleading. Recently, the case settled for $8.55 million. Judge Marie Seth 

Weiner, Chair of the Complex Litigation Department, approved the Settlement 

and entered Final Judgment on April 4, 2016. 

x In re BOFI Holding Holding, Inc. Shareholder Deriv. Litig., Case No. 

15CV2722-GPC-KSC (United States District Court for the Southern District of 

California). By Order dated June 9, 2016, the Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel of the 

United States District Court for the Southern District of California appointed 

Bottini & Bottini as Lead Counsel over four related shareholder derivative 

actions brought on behalf of BofI Holding, Inc. Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated 

Amended Complaint on August 26, 2016. The Amended Complaint alleges that 

due to the misconduct of BofI’s fiduciaries, BofI suffered from a myriad of 

internal-control and risk-management problems during the Relevant Period. 

According to the internal audits conducted by a former employee turned 

whistleblower named Erhart, BofI was making substantial loans to foreign 

nationals, including politically-exposed persons such as foreign officials in war 

zones, in potential violation of anti-money-laundering laws and other banking 

regulations. Contrary to BofI’s representations to the Office of the Comptroller 

of Currency (“OCC”), hundreds of BofI accounts lacked required taxCase: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 11 of 31 PageID #:3825
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 7 

f 

identification numbers (“TIN”). By order dated August 8, 2017, the Court 

denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and held that Plaintiff had adequately 

alleged “demand futility” with great particularity. Later, the court granted a 

subsequent motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs appealed and prevailed in part in the 

Ninth Circuit -- In re Bofi Holding, Inc S'holder Litig., 848 Fed. Appx. 234 (9th

Cir. Feb. 25, 2021). The case was remanded to the district court where it 

continues to be litigated. 

x In re PG&E Corp. Shareholder Deriv. Litig., Case No. 3:16-cv-00973-SI 

(United States District Court for the Northern District of California). Bottini & 

Bottini was counsel for the Plaintiff in a shareholder derivative action involving 

Pacific Gas & Electric Corp in federal court in San Francisco. The case sought 

damages on PG&E's behalf and against current and former officers and 

directors of the Company due to the defendants' breaches of fiduciary duty 

related to pipeline safety at PG&E, including a deadly 2010 explosion in San 

Bruno, California. PG&E was ultimately indicted for obstruction of justice and 

violation of federal and state safety standards by the Department of Justice, and 

was later convicted on several counts. In addition to filing the shareholder 

derivative case, Bottini & Bottini filed a case in California state court to enforce 

a shareholder inspection demand which sought company documents such as 

board of director minutes, and which documents were related to the alleged 

wrongdoing by the Company's officers and directors. In late 2016 and early 

2017, the case and several related lawsuits in California state court were settled 

on highly favorable terms, including the payment of $90 million in cash by the 

defendants (and/or their insurance carriers) to PG&E, plus the enactment of 

very significant corporate governance reforms designed to avoid future harm 

to PG&E and its shareholders. On July 18, 2017, the California state court 

granted final approval to the settlement agreement. 

x Justice John Trotter (Ret.), Trustee of the PG&E Fire Victim Trust v. Williams 

et al., Lead Case No. CGC-17-562591 (Superior Court for the State of California, 

County of San Francisco). Bottini & Bottini was retained by Justice John 

Trotter to assert claims against various former officers and directors of PG&E 

Corporation. The suit seeks damages for breaches of fiduciary duty committed 

by such officers and directors in connection with wildfires caused by PG&E 

Corp. in Northern California, and any proceeds recovered in the case will be 

paid to the victims of wildfires. The lawsuit was originally filed as a shareholder 

derivative action. In 2020, Justice Trotter substituted into the case as the 

plaintiff and retained Bottini & Bottini and three other law firms. The case is 

currently in the discovery phase. 

x Cook v. McCullough (In re Career Education Shareholder Deriv. Litig.), No. 11 

C 9119 (N.D. Ill.). Bottini & Bottini, Inc. was lead counsel for the plaintiff in 

this shareholder derivative action on behalf of Career Education Corporation 

against its officers and directors. By order dated August 13, 2012, the Hon. 

John W. Darrah denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss on demand futility 

grounds. See 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114621 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 13, 2012). Bottini & 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 12 of 31 PageID #:3826
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 8 

f 

Bottini, Inc. settled the case on October 25, 2013 for a cash payment of $20 

million and significant corporate governance reforms at Career Education. By 

Order dated Jan. 28, 2014, Judge Darrah granted final approval to the 

settlement. 

x In re Lumber Liquidators Holdings Sec. Litig., Master No. 4:13-cv-00157-

AWA-DEM (United States District Court the Eastern District of Virginia). 

Bottini & Bottini served as one of the plaintiffs’ counsel in these consolidated 

shareholder derivative actions alleging harm to Lumber Liquidators arising out 

of allegations that the company sold flooring with formaldehyde levels that 

exceeded federal regulations. The case was settled in exchange for a cash 

payment to Lumber Liquidators of $26 million plus the enactment of 

significant corporate governance reforms, including changes to Lumber 

Liquidators’ board composition and practices, changes to the Board’s 

Regulatory Affairs Committee, reforms to the company’s compensation 

policies, and improvements to the company’s whistleblower policies. The court 

approved the settlement by order dated November 17, 2016. 

x In re FireEye Inc. Sec. Litig., Case No. 1-14-cv-266866 (Superior Court for the 

State of California, County of Santa Clara, the Hon. Peter H. Kirwan). Bottini 

& Bottini served as co-counsel in this securities class action which asserted 

claims under the Securities Act of 1933 against FireEye Inc., its board of 

directors, and the underwriters who conducted a Secondary Offering of 

company stock on March 6, 2014. After surviving multiple motions to dismiss, 

defeating defendants’ appeals seeking appellate review, and engaging in three 

years of litigation and discovery, the case settled in 2017 for $10.25 million. 

Judge Kirwan issued an order granting final approval to the settlement on 

August 10, 2017. 

x In re Facebook, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Privacy Litigation, No. 4:18-CV01792-HSG (N.D. Cal.). Bottini & Bottini is serving as a member of Plaintiffs’ 

Executive Committee in this shareholder derivative litigation on behalf of 

Facebook, Inc. relating to allegations that personal information of at least 50 

million Facebook users was improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica in a 

major data breach. 

x Hornung v. A10 Networks, Inc., Case No. 1-15-CV-282286 (Superior Court for 

the State of California, County of Santa Clara). Bottini & Bottini was Lead 

Counsel in this shareholder derivative action brought on behalf of A10 

Networks, Inc. The complaint asserted claims under California and Delaware 

law for breach of fiduciary duty against the Company’s officers and directors 

relating to judgment against the Company for intellectual property violations 

and for claims relating to the Company’s initial public offering. The case settled 

in exchange for the Company agreeing to enact substantial corporate 

governance changes. By order dated March 1, 2017, the Hon. Peter Kirwan, 

Chair of the Complex Litigation Department, granted final approval to the 

Settlement. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 13 of 31 PageID #:3827
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 9 

f 

x In re Southern California Gas Leak Cases, JCCP No. 4861 (Superior Court for 

the State of California, County of Los Angeles). Bottini & Bottini is one of the 

counsel for plaintiffs in this shareholder derivative action on behalf of Sempra 

Energy relating to losses suffered by the Company in connection with a massive 

natural gas leak at the Company’s Aliso Canyon, California underground 

storage well, which has been described as one of the most devastating 

environmental disasters in U.S. history. 

x In re Sanchez Energy Deriv. Litig., C.A. No. 9132-VCG (Delaware Chancery 

Court). Bottini & Bottini represented shareholders of Sanchez Energy Corp. in 

this shareholder derivative action, which alleged that the officers and directors 

of Sanchez Energy engaged in self-dealing and breached their fiduciary duties 

by engaging in transactions that benefitted themselves at the expense of the 

Company and its shareholders. The complaint alleged that the Company's 

insiders own and controlled a privately held company named Sanchez 

Resources. Eduardo Sanchez, the son of Sanchez Jr. and brother of Sanchez III, 

established and ran Sanchez Resources, while both Sanchez Jr. and Sanchez III 

maintained equity interests in it. In August 2013, Sanchez Energy, with the 

Board’s approval, agreed to purchase working interests in the Tuscaloosa 

Marine Shale (“TMS”) from Sanchez Resources (the “Transaction”). Sanchez 

Energy purchased these working interests at a price seventeen times higher 

than other oil and gas companies have paid for similar interests in the TMS. 

The beneficiaries of this over-priced purchase were the Sanchez family. On 

August 15, 2017, the parties announced that they reached a settlement which is 

worth approximately $27.75 million. Under the terms of the Stipulation of 

Settlement, the directors of Sanchez Energy along with the directors of the 

company that sold it the mining interests will pay $11.75 million to Sanchez 

Energy, and the equity of the seller in Sanchez Resources, valued at more than 

$16 million, will be transferred to Sanchez Energy. 

x In re Tibco Software, Inc. Stockholders Litig., C.A. No. 10319-CB (Delaware 

Chancery Court). Bottini & Bottini was one of the counsels for plaintiffs in this 

shareholder class action lawsuit asserting claims for breach of fiduciary duty 

against Tibco’s former offices and directors, and claims for aiding and abetting 

breach of fiduciary duty against Goldman Sachs, arising from the $4.2 billion 

sale of Tibco to Vista Equity Partners in 2014. After hard-fought litigation, the 

case was settled in 2016 for $30.4 million. On September 7, 2016, Chancellor 

Bouchard of Delaware Chancery Court approved the settlement, declaring it an 

“excellent outcome for the shareholders.” 

x In re American Apparel Shareholder Deriv. Litig., Case No. BC443763 

(Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles). Bottini & 

Bottini served as Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel in this shareholder derivative 

litigation on behalf of American Apparel and against its former officers and 

directors, including founder and CEO Dov Charney. After the company filed 

for bankruptcy, the Litigation Trustee appointed by the bankruptcy court hired 

Bottini & Bottini to continue to pursue the claims, including the claims against 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 14 of 31 PageID #:3828
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 10 

f 

Dov Charney, the former CEO of the Company who is alleged to have 

committed egregious sexual harassment of female employees at the company. 

The case is still being litigated. 

x In re Sogou, Inc. Securities Litigation, Lead Case No. 18CIV06699 (Superior 

Court for the State of California, County of San Mateo). Bottini & Bottini is 

serving as Lead Counsel in this shareholder class action relating to Sogou’s IPO. 

x In re Pinduoduo Securities Litigation, Case No. 18CIV04256 (Superior Court 

for the State of California, County of San Mateo). Bottini & Bottini is Co-Lead 

Counsel in this shareholder class action seeking damages under the Securities 

Act of 1933 relating to Pinduoduo’s IPO. 

x In re PFF Bancorp, Inc. ERISA Litigation, Master File No. 08-cv-1093 (C.D. 

Cal.). Mr. Bottini was one of the attorneys for plaintiffs in this ERISA class 

action, which alleged that defendants breached their fiduciary duties by 

continuing to allow plan participants to invest in the company’s stock. The case 

settled for $3 million, plus the allowance of a $400,000 bankruptcy claim, after 

the company declared bankruptcy. 

x In re General Growth Properties, Inc. ERISA Litig., Master File No. 08-6680 

(N.D. Ill.). Mr. Bottini and Mr. Chang were members of Plaintiffs’ Executive 

Committee in this ERISA class action litigation, which alleged that defendants 

breached their fiduciary duties by continuing to allow plan participants to 

invest in the company’s stock. The case settled for $5.75 million in 2010. By 

Order dated December 9, 2010, the Hon. James B. Zagel of the United States 

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted final approval of the 

settlement. 

x In re Terex Corp. ERISA Litig., Master File No. 3:10-cv-00006-RNC (D. 

Conn.). Bottini & Bottini was one of Plaintiffs’ counsel in this class action 

lawsuit under ERISA, which alleged that defendants breached their fiduciary 

duties by continuing to allow plan participants to invest in the company’s stock. 

The case settled for $2.5 million. Final approval of the settlement was entered 

by the Hon. Robert M. Chatigny of the United States District Court for the 

District of Connecticut on November 4, 2015. 

x Robinson v. Audience, No. 12-cv-232227 (Santa Clara, California Superior 

Court). Bottini & Bottini was one of the counsels for plaintiffs in this securities 

class action alleging claims for strict liability under the Securities Act of 1933, 

arising out of an allegedly false and misleading Registration Statement and 

Prospectus for Audience’s IPO. By order dated September 3, 2013, Judge 

Kleinberg denied defendants’ demurrer, denied defendants’ motion to stay, and 

granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel. Plaintiffs moved for class certification, 

which motion was granted by Order dated Jan. 16, 2015. The case was settled 

for $6,050,000. By Order dated June 10, 2016, the Court granted final 

approval to the settlement. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 15 of 31 PageID #:3829
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 11 

f 

x Wiley v. Envivio, et al., No. CIV517185 (San Mateo, California Superior Court). 

Bottini & Bottini was one of the counsels for plaintiffs in this securities class 

action which asserted claims under the 1933 Act relating to Envivio’s IPO. In 

March 2014, Judge Marie Seth Weiner overruled defendants’ demurrer. Bottini 

& Bottini, Inc. assisted in procuring a settlement involving an $8.5 million cash 

payment which was approved by Judge Weiner on June 22, 2015. 

x Snellink v. Gulf Resources, Inc., No. 11-cv-03722-ODW (C.D. Cal.). Bottini & 

Bottini, Inc. is co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs in this securities-fraud class 

action brought under the federal securities laws. By order dated May 15, 2012, 

the court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss. See 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

67839 (C.D. Cal. May 15, 2012). Bottini & Bottini, Inc. procured a settlement 

involving a $2.125 million cash payment which was approved by the Honorable 

Otis D. Wright II on January 18, 2014. 

x Diaz v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corp., Case No. 13cv1585 BAS 

(JLB) (S.D. Cal.). Bottini & Bottini was Co-Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs in 

this consumer class action case challenging the marketing and sale of home 

warranty plans by Defendant First American. After the case was dismissed by 

the district court, Plaintiffs appealed and obtained reversal by the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals. See Diaz v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corp., 

732 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2013) (holding that an unaccepted offer of judgment 

pursuant to F.R.C.P. 68 for full amount of plaintiff’s damages does not moot a 

plaintiff’s case; 9th Circuit refused to follow other circuits which had held to the 

contrary). 

x In re General Growth Properties, Inc. ERISA Litigation, No. 08 C 6791 (N.D. 

Ill.). Mr. Bottini and Mr. Chang were members of Plaintiffs’ Executive 

Committee in this class action under ERISA seeking recovery of losses to 

General Growth Properties, Inc.’s employee retirement savings plans. 

Notwithstanding General Growth’s filing for bankruptcy court protection, the 

Honorable James B. Zagel approved a settlement of $5.75 million on December 

9, 2010. 

x Great Pacific Securities v. Barclays, et al., No. SACV 14-01210 (C.D. Cal.). 

Bottini & Bottini is Co-Lead Counsel for plaintiff in this class action lawsuit, 

which is brought under California law and which seeks to recover losses 

suffered by Barclays’ customers whose trades were submitted for execution on 

Barclays’ LX dark pool exchange. The case was transferred to the Southern 

District of New York in 2014, but in 2015 was transferred back to the Central 

District of California, where it is pending. 

x Schuh v. HCA Holdings, Inc., No. 3:11-cv-01033 (M.D. Tenn.). Bottini & 

Bottini was one of the counsels for the plaintiffs in this securities class action 

lawsuit seeking damages under the Securities Act of 1933 relating to HCA’s IPO. 

By order dated May 28, 2013, the Court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss. 

See Schuh v. HCA Holdings, Inc., 947 F. Supp. 2d 882 (M.D. Tenn. 2013). By 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 16 of 31 PageID #:3830
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 12 

f 

order dated September 22, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class 

certification. See Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶98,187; 2014 WL 4716231 (M.D. 

Tenn.). In November 2015, the case settled for $215 million. 

x Karlin v. Alcatel, No. SA CV 00-0214-DOC (C.D. Cal.). Mr. Bottini represented 

investors who received a tender offer for their shares from Alcatel S.A., a French 

telecommunications company. Mr. Bottini was the lead partner at his firm, 

Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, which served as Co-Lead 

Counsel for the Class. The case settled for $10.5 million on the eve of trial. See 

2001 WL 1301216 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2001) (denying defendants’ motion for 

summary judgment). 

x In re Novastar Home Mortgage, Inc. Mortgage Lending Practices Litigation, 

No. CV05-1677, MDL Docket No. 1677 (S.D. Ga.). Mr. Bottini was one of the 

lead attorneys in this class action litigation under the Real Estate Settlement 

Procedures Act of 1974 (“RESPA”). After three years of litigation, Chief Judge 

William T. Moore entered a Final Judgment on September 18, 2007 approving 

a nationwide class action settlement of Plaintiffs’ RESPA claims in which 

approximately $20 million in cash payments were made available to class 

members. 

x Reyes v. Zynga, Inc., Case No. CGC-12-522876 (San Francisco Superior Court). 

Bottini & Bottini was co-lead counsel in this class action alleging violations of 

the Securities Act of 1933 on behalf of a class of investors who bought Zynga 

stock in the company’s Secondary Offering, which closed on April 3, 2012. 

Bottini & Bottini successfully had the case remanded to state court after being 

removed to federal court by defendants (see 2013 WL 5529754). In addition, 

by Order dated August 26, 2013, the Court denied defendants’ demurrer on 

subject matter grounds and held that plaintiffs could bring their ’33 Act federal 

claims in state court and that SLUSA did not eliminate concurrent jurisdiction 

in state and federal court for ’33 Act claims. By order dated September 29, 

2014, the Court denied defendants’ demurrer as to the sufficiency of the 

complaint’s allegations and denied defendants’ motion to stay the action. 

x In re SunPower Corp. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Master File No. C09-05731 (N.D. Cal.). Bottini & Bottini is Co-Lead Counsel in this shareholder 

derivative litigation pending in San Francisco, which involves alleged 

accounting fraud and the restatement of the financial statements of SunPower 

Corporation. In October 2013, the case was settled in exchange for Sunpower’s 

agreement to enact significant corporate governance reforms. By order dated 

August 22, 2014, the Court granted final approval to the settlement. 

x In re Pacific Capital Bancorp Derivative Litigation, No. CIVRS1340306 (Cal. 

Super. Ct., County of Santa Barbara). Mr. Bottini and his prior firm, Chapin 

Fitzgerald Sullivan & Bottini LLP, were Lead Counsel in this shareholder 

derivative action which alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by certain officers 

and directors of Pacific Capital Bancorp. By Order dated October 8, 2010, the 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 17 of 31 PageID #:3831
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 13 

f 

Court denied defendants’ demurrer and held that Lead Plaintiff had adequately 

alleged demand futility under California law. After two years of litigation, in 

which over a million pages of documents were produced and reviewed and 

certain legal issues were litigated in the court of appeal, a substantial settlement 

was reached in which significant corporate governance changes were made to 

the Company, including changes to provide greater Board independence and 

accountability, strict internal financial controls, significant and substantial 

revisions to PCBC’s credit policies (including the establishment of a new Credit 

Administration Group, the restriction of lending authority to specified senior 

loan officers, and enhanced new appraisal guidelines), new requirements 

obligating any individual desiring to serve on PCBC’s board to own a minimum 

amount of stock in the Company, annual review of the Company’s Code of 

Ethics, a new corporate governance training program for PCBC directors, new 

procedures to handle internal and external complaints from whistleblowers, 

annual review of all committee charters, and a vigorous insider trading policy. 

By Order dated January 19, 2012, the Court granted final approval of the 

settlement and entered a final judgment. 

x In re Herald, Primeo, and Thema Funds Securities Litigation, No. 09 Civ. 

0289 (RMB) (S.D.N.Y.). Bottini & Bottini, Inc. was Lead Counsel for the Thema 

Fund plaintiffs in this securities-fraud class action case under the PSLRA. The 

action was brought on behalf of all persons who invested in three Madoff 

“feeder funds” controlled by Bank Medici – the Herald, Primeo, and Thema 

funds. After a partial $62.5 million settlement was obtained from one of 

numerous defendants, the Court dismissed the case on forum non conveniens 

grounds and denied preliminarily approval of the settlement. 

x In re Level 3 Communications, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 09-cv-00200-

PAB-CBS (D. Colo.). Mr. Bottini and his prior firm, Johnson Bottini LLP, were 

Co-Lead Counsel in this securities-fraud class action asserting claims under 

Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

x In re UCBH Holdings, Inc. Deriv. Litig., No. CGC-09-492237 (San Francisco 

Superior Court). Mr. Bottini and his prior firm, Johnson Bottini LLP, were 

Lead Counsel in this shareholder derivative action. After the company declared 

bankruptcy, the Trustee asserted the claims contained in the lawsuit and 

eventually recovered $4 million from the defendants. 

x In re Arena Resources, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, No. CV10-01069 (Nev. 

Dist. Ct., County of Washoe). Mr. Bottini and his firm (Johnson Bottini LLP) 

served as one of the counsels for Plaintiffs in this shareholder class action 

challenging the acquisition of Arena Resources by SandRidge Energy, Inc. As 

a result of the prosecution of the action, SandRidge raised the cash portion of 

the merger consideration by $2.00 per share, reduced the duration of the 

matching rights period, amended the terms of the non-solicitation clause in 

favor of Arena, reduced the amount of termination fees payable by a party from 

$50 million to $39 million, made additional material financial disclosures to 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 18 of 31 PageID #:3832
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 14 

f 

Arena’s shareholders and extended the date of the shareholder meeting to vote 

on the merger. 

x Bamboo Partners LLC v. The Robert Mondavi Corp., No. 26-27170 (Cal. Super. 

Ct., County of Napa). Mr. Bottini represented the plaintiff common 

shareholders of the Mondavi Corporation in connection with the acquisition of 

the company by Constellation Brands, Inc. Mondavi had a dual-class stock 

structure pursuant to which the common shareholders owned Class A shares 

and the Mondavi family members owned Class B shares. Plaintiffs alleged that 

the insider Class B Mondavi family members improperly received more 

consideration for their shares than the common Class A public shareholders. 

The case was settled when defendants agreed to pay an additional $10.8 million 

to the Class A shareholder plaintiffs. 

x In re Dole Shareholder Litigation, No. B281969 (Cal. Super. Ct., County of Los 

Angeles). In this mergers & acquisitions, going-private class action case, Mr. 

Bottini was one of two lead partners from his firm at the time (Wolf Haldenstein 

Adler Freeman & Herz LLP), which served as Co-Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs 

and was involved in all aspects of the litigation. A $172 million settlement was 

obtained for the Class when the tender offer price was increased by $4 per 

share. 

x In re Mentor Corp. Shareholder Litigation, No. 1304537 (Superior Court for 

the State of California, County of Santa Barbara). Mr. Bottini’s prior firm, 

Johnson Bottini, LLP was appointed Co-Lead Counsel (along with Robbins 

Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP) in this shareholder class action case which 

challenged the fairness of the tender offer submitted by Johnson & Johnson for 

all the public shares of Mentor Corporation. 

x In re Sepracor, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, C.A. No. 4871-VCS (Del. Ch.). 

Mr. Bottini and his prior firm, Johnson Bottini, LLP, served as Co-Lead 

Counsel in this shareholder class action challenging a $2.6 billion tender offer 

for all the outstanding shares of Sepracor, Inc. by Dainippon Sumitomo 

Pharma Co., Ltd. of Japan. After moving for a preliminary injunction and 

obtaining expedited discovery, the case was settled by defendants agreeing to 

disclose substantial additional disclosures to Sepracor’s shareholders 

regarding the financial analyses performed by Sepracor’s investment bankers. 

The additional disclosures were filed via an Amendment No. 2 to the Schedule 

14D-9 filed on October 2, 2009. 

x In re Heritage Bond Litigation, No. 02-MDL-1475-DT (C.D. Cal.). In this class 

action bondholder litigation, which was ordered consolidated in Los Angeles by 

the Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Mr. Bottini represented the outside 

director defendants. After obtaining dismissal of most of the claims against the 

outside directors, Mr. Bottini obtained dismissal of the remaining claims 

against the outside directors for a combined payment of $102,500. The other 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 19 of 31 PageID #:3833
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 15 

f 

defendants not represented by Mr. Bottini paid $27 million to settle the case. 

See 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13627 (C.D. Cal. June 10, 2005). 

x In re Dell, Inc. Derivative Litigation, No. 06-cv-0839 (W.D. Tex.). By order 

dated March 1, 2007, the Honorable Sam Sparks appointed Mr. Bottini’s prior 

firm, Johnson Bottini, LLP, Co-Lead Counsel in this shareholder derivative 

action. After approximately two years of litigation, the case settled while on 

appeal. 

x In re Sunterra Corp. Shareholder Litigation, No. A525433 (Nev. Dist. Ct., 

County of Clark). Mr. Bottini was Co-Lead Counsel in this shareholder action 

which challenged the fairness and disclosures made in SEC filings pertaining 

to a buyout offer for the company and certain actions by present and former 

officers and directors of Sunterra. The case was settled in 2007 when Sunterra 

agreed to file a supplemental filing with the United States Securities and 

Exchange Commission providing additional material information pertaining to 

the tender offer. 

x Deane v. Tombros (In re NPS Pharmaceuticals Securities Litigation), No. 

60913838 (Utah Dist. Ct., Salt Lake City). Mr. Bottini and his firm, Johnson 

Bottini LLP, were Lead Counsel in this shareholder derivative action filed 

against current and former officers and directors of NPS Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 

This matter was settled on terms that required the implementation of 

significant corporate therapeutic changes at NPS. 

x In re American Express ERISA Litigation, No. 08 Civ. 10834 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y.). 

Mr. Bottini served as one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs, who 

asserted class action claims under ERISA on behalf of plan participants due to 

breaches of fiduciary duties by the defendants. 

x In re Heelys Inc. Derivative Litigation, No. 07-cv-1682 (N.D. Tex.). Mr. 

Bottini’s prior firm, Johnson Bottini, LLP, was Co-Lead Counsel in this 

shareholder derivative action filed against current and former officers and 

directors of Heelys Inc. After more than a year of litigation and multiple 

mediations, this matter was settled in 2010 on terms that required the 

implementation of significant corporate therapeutic changes. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 20 of 31 PageID #:3834
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 16 

f 

Biographies of Attorneys 

Francis A. Bottini, Jr. 

Mr. Bottini practices in the areas of securities, consumer, and privacy class actions, 

mergers & acquisitions, antitrust, shareholder derivative litigation, and ERISA class 

action litigation. Prior to forming Bottini & Bottini, Inc., Mr. Bottini was a partner at 

several firms, including Chapin Fitzgerald & Bottini LLP, Johnson Bottini, LLP, and Wolf 

Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP. Mr. Bottini has successfully achieved several 

multi-million dollar recoveries in securities, consumer, and antitrust class action cases 

throughout the country. Mr. Bottini served as an Adjunct Professor of Business Law at 

the University of San Diego from 1995 to 1997.

Mr. Bottini is a 1991 graduate of St. Louis University (B.A. magna cum laude), and the 

University of San Diego School of Law (J.D. cum laude 1994), where he was the Lead 

Articles Editor of the San Diego Law Review and received the American Jurisprudence 

Award in Property. Mr. Bottini is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme 

Court, all California state and federal courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the 

Second, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits, the United States District Court for 

Colorado, and the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. He is 

AV-rated by Martindale-Hubbell. 

The following are some examples of Mr. Bottini’s reported cases: 

x Diaz v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corp., 732 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 

2013) (holding that an unaccepted offer of judgment pursuant to F.R.C.P. 68 

for full amount of plaintiff’s damages does not moot a plaintiff’s case; 9th 

Circuit refused to follow other circuits which had held to the contrary). 

x Reyes v. Zynga, Inc., No. 12–05065 JSW, 2013 WL 5529754 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 

2013) (granting plaintiff’s motion to remand claims brought under the 

Securities Act of 1933 to state court). 

x Cook v. McCullough, No. 11 C 9119, 2012, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114621, 2012 WL 

3488442 (N.D. Ill. August 13, 2012) (denying motion to dismiss in shareholder 

derivative action brought on behalf of Career Education Corporation against its 

officers and directors for breach of fiduciary duty); 

x Snellink v. Gulf Resources, Inc., No. 11-cv-03722-ODW, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

67839 (C.D. Cal. May 15, 2012) (denying motion to dismiss in securities-fraud 

class action complaint); 

x Smith v. Apollo Group, Inc., No. CV-11-0722-PHX-PGR, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

3672 (D. Ariz. Jan. 11, 2012) (denying defendants’ motion to stay shareholder 

derivative case pending completion of an internal investigation by a Special 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 21 of 31 PageID #:3835
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 17 

f 

Committee of the Board of Directors and also denying a stay of the case until 

resolution of a related securities-fraud class action case); 

x Ferguson v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc., No. SACV 11-0127 DOC (AJWx), 2012 

U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1358 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2012) (denying defendants’ motion to 

stay case pending interlocutory appeal of order denying motion to compel 

arbitration as to plaintiffs’ claims for injunctive relief under California Business 

& Professions Code §17200 et seq.); 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119261 (C.D. Cal. 

Oct. 6, 2011) (denying in part a motion to compel arbitration); 

x Rosendahl v. Bridgepoint Education, Inc., No. 11cv0061 WQH (WVG), 2011 

U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119735 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2011) (denying in part motion to 

dismiss consumer class action complaint alleging fraud and misrepresentation 

by for-profit college); 

x Bottini v. City of San Diego, 27 Cal. App. 5th 281 (2018) (affirming trial court’s 

grant of mandamus in action to set aside City Council resolution due to the 

improper use of baseline in California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA“) 

appeal; successfully arguing that prior California Supreme Court opinion was 

abrogated in light of subsequent U.S. Supreme Court precedent). 

x In re Coventry Healthcare, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 09-CV-2661-AW, 

2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34891 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2011), reh’g denied, Boyd v. 

Coventry Healthcare, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135000 (D. Md. Nov. 18, 2011) 

(denying motion to dismiss in ERISA class action case); 

x Harrison v. XTO Energy, Inc., 705 F. Supp. 2d 572 (N.D. Tex. 2010) (denying 

defendants’ motion to dismiss or stay action under Colorado River abstention 

doctrine); 

x In re Extreme Networks, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, No. C-07-

02268-RMW, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111445 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2009), 

reconsideration denied by, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32685 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 

2010) (denying motion to dismiss and upholding shareholder derivative 

complaint, finding that plaintiff had adequately alleged demand futility under 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1); 

x In re Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. Derivative Litigation, 615 F. 

Supp. 2d 1018 (N.D. Cal. 2009) (denying in part and granting in part motion to 

dismiss in shareholder derivative action, after Mr. Bottini was retained by the 

Company’s Special Litigation Committee and an amended complaint was filed 

on behalf of the Company); 

x In re Dynamic Random Access Memory Antitrust Litigation, No. M 02-1486, 

2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39841 (N.D. Cal. June 5, 2006) (granting motion for 

class certification in direct purchaser antitrust class action involving DRAM 

computer memory); 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 22 of 31 PageID #:3836
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 18 

f 

x Karlin v. Alcatel, No. SA CV 00-0214-DOC, 2001 WL 1301216 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 

13, 2001) (denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment); 

x In re Imperial Credit Industries, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. CV 98-8842 

SVW, 2000 WL 1049320 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2000) (denying defendants’ 

motion to dismiss in a securities-fraud action under Section 10(b) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934); and

x In re USA Talks.com Securities Litigation, No. 99-CV-0162-L(JA), 2000 WL 

1887516 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2000) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss in 

10b-5 case in one of the first reported cases after passage of the Private 

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995).

On April 18-20, 2005, Mr. Bottini gave a presentation on Securities Class Action 

Litigation at the 2nd Annual CFO Forum in Seoul, South Korea. 

Albert Y. Chang 

Mr. Chang specializes in representing shareholders and consumer in class actions. He 

also has extensive experience litigating privacy cases and qui tam cases, and has 

substantial experience handling appeals. 

Before joining Bottini & Bottini, Inc. in 2009, Mr. Chang had over ten years of experience 

in federal litigation. He served as a judicial law clerk to United States District Judge 

Suzanne B. Conlon for the Northern District of Illinois and to United States District Judge 

Roger T. Benitez for the Southern District of California. 

In addition to his judicial clerkships, Mr. Chang litigated complex cases on behalf of both 

plaintiffs and defendants. He prosecuted securities and ERISA class actions on behalf of 

shareholders. He also defended executives, energy companies, insurers, and trade 

associations for six years at the New York office of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, where he 

focused on litigating high-stakes cases and conducting corporate internal investigations. 

A member of the New York and California bars, Mr. Chang is admitted to practice in 

numerous federal trial and appellate courts. He is a graduate of Beloit College (B.A. 1997) 

and Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington (J.D. 2001). He is fluent in 

Cantonese and Mandarin. 

Michelle Ciccarelli Lerach 

Ms. Lerach is a 1993 graduate of the University of Kentucky School of Law and is admitted 

to the Kentucky and California bars. Ms. Lerach has dedicated her life to fighting for those 

without enough voice, from fighting for immigrants’ rights as a young law student to 

serving as partner/Of Counsel to the nation’s largest plaintiff’s firms, representing 

shareholders, workers, and consumers in a broad range of complex and class-action 

litigation for fraudulent business practices, human rights abuses, and labor and 

employment violations. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 23 of 31 PageID #:3837
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 19 

f 

After graduating from the University of Kentucky College of Law, Ms. Lerach served as 

law clerk to the Honorable Sara Walter Combs, Kentucky Court of Appeals, and practiced 

law in Lexington (Newberry, Hargrove & Rambicure, PSC) and Louisville (Greenbaum, 

Doll & McDonald, LLP) before relocating to California in 1999. 

In California, she joined Milberg Weiss and was a lead litigator in many cases, including 

Does I v. The Gap, Inc., Case No. 01-0031 (D.N. Mariana Islands), a case on behalf of 

approximately 25,000 sweatshop workers against leading clothing manufacturers, which 

successfully concluded with a $20 million settlement and a precedent-setting Monitoring 

Program to oversee labor and human rights practices in Saipan’s garment factories. 

During her time at the firm and successor firms, she also worked on cases on behalf of the 

Sierra Club & the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (cross-border trucking), as well 

as a number of high-profile securities class actions such as Enron ($7.3 billion recovered) 

and coordinated private actions like WorldCom. In 2008, she received the Consumer 

Attorneys of California, Women's Law Caucus Award as Outstanding Consumer 

Advocate. 

Ms. Lerach’s passion for law intersects with activism both in her pro bono work and in 

her teaching: she worked as a consultant to the Liberian Ministry of Gender & 

Development with respect to that country's proposed constitutional revisions, specifically 

as relates to gender neutrality; an outspoken critic of current GMO labeling policy, she 

was involved in the 2012 California ballot initiative to label GMOs (Prop 37), organizing 

university forums and debating opponents of the measure in San Diego, and served on 

the steering committee of Californians for GE Labeling, which spearheaded the renewed 

effort to achieve GMO labeling in California in 2016; and she is an advocate for 

sustainable farm internship programs, and was chosen as one of San Diego Magazine’s 

50 People to Watch 2011 for this work. 

Ms. Lerach speaks regularly at a number of institutions, including previous presentations 

at the Buchmann Faculty of Law at Tel Aviv University (regarding the recently adopted 

Israeli class-action statute), Cornell University Law School (Joint JD/MBA Program), the 

University of Kentucky College of Law (Randall-Park Colloquium), and most recently the 

University of San Diego, moderating panels on Ethical Eating and Water Matters (in 

conjunction with the Changemaker Challenge) and the Future Thought Leaders series on 

behalf of the Berry Good Food Foundation on UCTV, for which she has received four San 

Diego Press Club Excellence in Journalism Awards. She was the author of “Improving 

Corporate Governance Through Litigation Settlements,” Corporate Governance Review. 

Ms. Lerach serves as the Vice Chair of the Board of the University of California Press 

Foundation, focused on progressive scholarship; a member of the Advisory Board of the 

Women Peacemakers Program at the Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice at the University 

of San Diego; an Advisor to Kiss the Ground, devoted to promoting regenerative 

agriculture, connecting sustainable agricultural practices to the larger issue of climate 

change, and Executive Producer to a documentary film of the same name slated for release 

1/18; and Founder/President of the Berry Good Food Foundation. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 24 of 31 PageID #:3838
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 20 

f 

Ms. Lerach is currently serving as one of the lead counsel in Mayberry et al., Derivatively 

as members and Beneficiaries of Trust Funds on behalf of the Kentucky Retirement 

Systems v. Aldridge et al, CASE No. 2019-CA-000043-OA (Circuit Court, Franklin, Kentucky), 

a derivative action seeking to recover billions of dollars in losses sustained by the 

Kentucky Retirement System due to wrongdoing committed by KKR, Blackstone, and 

various individual defendants. 

Nina M. Bottini 

Nina M. Bottini is a 2001 graduate of Heinrich-Heine-University School of Law, 

Dusseldorf, Germany, and received an LL.M. degree (Masters in Comparative Law) from 

California Western School of Law in 2006. Ms. Bottini specializes in securities class action 

litigation, ERISA class action litigation, antitrust, securities, and shareholder derivative 

actions. 

Her representative cases include In re DRAM Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1486 (N.D. 

Cal.), and In re Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. Derivative Litigation, No. 

1:05cv41683 (Cal. Super. Ct., County of Santa Clara). 

Yury A. Kolesnikov 

Mr. Kolesnikov practices complex shareholder class action and derivative litigation in 

state and federal courts. His practice also involves consumer class actions under 

California law. He has significant experience litigating at both trial-court and appellate 

level. He has personally briefed appeals and petitions before the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Ninth Circuit, Supreme Court of California, Supreme Court of Missouri, and 

California Courts of Appeal, among others. He has also argued dispositive motions and 

appeals, including before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Judicial Panel 

on Multidistrict Litigation, and California Courts of Appeal. 

Prior to going into private practice, Mr. Kolesnikov served as a law clerk to the 

Honorable David R. Thompson (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit), the 

Honorable Irma E. Gonzalez (Chief Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern 

District of California), and the Honorable Roger T. Benitez (U.S. District Court for the 

Southern District of California). Prior to that, he served as a research assistant to the 

Honorable Anthony M. Kennedy (Supreme Court of the United States) and as an extern 

to the Honorable Consuelo M. Callahan (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit). As 

a result of the foregoing, he has an in-depth knowledge of the federal practice and 

procedure as well as the intricacies of the federal judicial system. 

Mr. Kolesnikov graduated first in his class from the University of the Pacific, McGeorge 

School of Law. During law school, he served as a research assistant to Dean Elizabeth 

Rindskopf Parker, former General Counsel for the National Security Agency and the 

Central Intelligence Agency as well as former Principal Deputy Legal Adviser at the U.S. 

Department of State. His work with Dean Parker focused on judicial independence, civil 

liberties, and national security. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 25 of 31 PageID #:3839
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 21 

f 

Anne Bottini Beste 

Ms. Beste is of counsel to Bottini & Bottini, Inc. She practices complex civil litigation, 

with an emphasis in consumer, shareholder, and privacy class actions. She is a 1992 

graduate of Northwestern University School of Law. She received her undergraduate 

degree in 1989 from Boston College, where she was Phi Beta Kappa and graduated magna 

cum laude with a B.A. in Economics. From 1996 to 2001, Ms. Beste practiced complex 

civil litigation at Swidler Berlin Shereff Freidman, LLP in Washington, D.C. Her practice 

at Swidler Berlin included employment litigation, environmental litigation, and trade 

secret litigation. Ms. Beste is admitted to practice in Washington, D.C., Missouri, Illinois, 

and California. 

Tera Gazallo 

Ms. Gazallo is a staff attorney at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. She practices in the field of 

shareholder class action and derivative actions. She is a 2009 graduate of University of 

the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, and also received a LLM in Taxation from the 

University of San Diego School of Law in 2011. Ms. Gazallo has represented shareholders 

and pension funds in litigation related to various antitrust and securities claims, including 

but not limited to claims under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act 

of 1934. She also clerked for the California Department of Corporations in 2008. 

Justus Benjamin III 

Mr. Benjamin worked as a contract attorney at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. He is a 2008 

graduate of Hofstra University in New York and a 2005 graduate of Washington 

University in St. Louis, and is a member of the California Bar. 

Todd Hipper 

Mr. Hipper worked as a contract attorney at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. He is a 2001 graduate 

of Georgetown University Law Center and a 1996 graduate of University of California at 

Berkeley, and is a member of the California Bar and New York Bar. 

Amy Hsiao 

Ms. Hsiao worked as a contract attorney at Bottini & Bottini, Inc. She is a 2008 graduate 

of California Western School of Law and was admitted to the California Bar in 2013. 

Stephanie M. Ammirati 

Ms. Ammirati is a paralegal specializing in complex civil litigation, consumer class 

actions, and shareholder derivative litigation. Before joining the firm in 2010, Ms. 

Ammirati developed a legal career as an attorney in both private practice and government 

service. She is a member of the Washington State Bar Association as well as the Idaho 

State Bar, and has an extensive range of experience in civil litigation. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 26 of 31 PageID #:3840
Bottini & Bottini, Inc. Firm Resume 

Page 22 

f 

Between 2006 and 2010 Ms. Ammirati served as a Deputy Attorney General at the Office 

of the Attorney General for the State of Idaho. Before her appointment as a Deputy 

Attorney General, Ms. Ammirati had nine years of experience in civil litigation while in 

private practice in Seattle. Additionally, she devoted time to volunteer work in the 

community by serving as a Court-Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) for many years. 

She also assisted domestic violence victims by providing pro bono legal services at the 

New Beginnings Family Law Clinic, and was a Board of Trustees Member of the FRIENDS 

of CASA. 

Ms. Ammirati received her Juris Doctor from Loyola Law School where she graduated on 

the Dean’s List and was the recipient of the Wiley W. Manuel Award for Pro Bono Legal 

Services. While in law school, she developed her legal skills through Loyola’s externship 

programs, performing clinical work at the Civil Appellate Division of the Los Angeles City 

Attorney’s Office, the Maynard Toll Pro Se Counseling Center, and the Alliance for 

Children’s Rights. Ms. Ammirati received her Bachelor of Arts degree from Pepperdine 

University where she graduated summa cum laude and was awarded Valedictorian of her 

class. 

Antonia Smith 

Ms. Smith is a paralegal at Bottini & Bottini Inc. She holds a Bachelors Degree in 

Psychology from the University of Phoenix, a Master Degree in Legal Studies and Dispute 

Resolution from Pepperdine University, and a Paralegal Certificate from the University 

of San Diego. 

Amelia Ardito 

Ms. Ardito is a paralegal at Bottini & Bottini Inc. She graduated in 2016 from the 

University of Southern Maine and obtained her paralegal certificate from the University 

of California, San Diego. 

Shelby Ramsey 

Ms. Ramsey has ten years of experience as a complex litigation paralegal, primarily in 

plaintiffs’ securities class actions, mergers and acquisitions, ERISA matters, shareholder 

derivative actions, and consumer and employee class action litigation. 

Ms. Ramsey earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Legal Studies, with a Minor in Speech 

Communications, in 2006 from Chapman University. She received her American Bar 

Association-approved Paralegal certificate from the University of San Diego in 2007. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 27 of 31 PageID #:3841
Exhibit 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 28 of 31 PageID #:3842
)LUP1DPH

&DWHJRULHV 7,7/(

$77251(<63$

               35(9,286

+2856

&855(17

+2856

&808/$7,9(

+2856

+

)UDQFLV%RWWLQL-U3         

$OEHUW&KDQJ3          <XU\.ROHVQLNRY$         

$QQH%HVWH$        

68%727$/          

121$77251(<6/&63/3/

               35(9,286

+2856

&855(17

+2856

&808/$7,9(

+2856

+

6WHSKDQLH$PPLUDWL63/        

$PHOLD$UGLWR3       

68%727$/         *5$1'727$/          

/HJDO5HVHDUFK,QYHVWLJDWLRQ)DFWXDO5HVHDUFK'LVFRYHU\:ULWWHQ'HSRVLWLRQ7DNLQJ	'HIHQGLQJ0HHW	&RQIHUHWF'RFXPHQW5HYLHZ,QFOXGLQJIRUGHSRSUHSFODVVFHUWH[SHUWVOLDELOLW\LVVXHVMXULVGLFWLRQDOLVVXHVDQGPHHWLQJVUHGRFUHYLHZ

3OHDGLQJV%ULHIV	0RWLRQV'UDIWLQJ5HVHDUFK6HUYLQJ	)LOLQJ&ODVV&HUWLILFDWLRQ6XPPDU\-XGJPHQW$SSHDOV&RXUW$SSHDUDQFHDQG3UHS([SHUWV

6HWWOHPHQWV	0HGLDWLRQ&DVH0DQDJHPHQW&ODVV1RWLFH7ULDO3UHS([KLELW	:LWQHVV/LVW-XU\,QVWUXFWLRQ9LRU'LUH2SHQLQJ6WDWHPHQWV&ORVLQJ$UJXPHQWV'HPRQVWUDWLYHVHWF7ULDO

3$/633/

IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., CONSUMER PRIVACY LITIGATION

EXHIBIT 2

TIME REPORT SUMMARY AT CURRENT RATES

%RWWLQL	%RWWLQL,QF 5HSRUWLQJ3HULRG ,QFHSWLRQWKURXJK)HEUXDU\

 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 29 of 31 PageID #:38
Exhibit 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 30 of 31 PageID #:3844
&$7(*25< '(6&5,37,21

,IQHFHVVDU\ &808/$7,9(&2676

/LWLJDWLRQ$VVHVVPHQW 

&RXUW&RVWV)LOLQJ)HHV 

([SHUWVFRQVXOWDQWV 

)HGHUDO([SUHVV8362QWUDF 

3RVWDJH860DLO 

6HUYLFHRI3URFHVV 

0HVVHQJHUGHOLYHU\ ,QFOXGHVIDVFLPLOHFRVWV 

+HDULQJ7UDQVFULSWV 

,QYHVWLJDWLRQ 

/H[LVZHVWODZ 

3KRWRFRSLHVLQ+RXVH 

3KRWRFRSLHV2XWVLGH 

7HOHSKRQHWHOHFRSLHU 

7UDYHO7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ

$LUSODQHV&RDFK)DUHV2QO\ 

7UDYHO0HDOV

SHUSHUVRQGD\FDS 

7UDYHO+RWHOV 

0LVFHOODQHRXV

727$/(;3(16(6 

IN RE: TIKTOK, INC., CONSUMER PRIVACY LITIGATION

(;+,%,7

(;3(16(5(32576800$5<

),501$0(%RWWLQL	%RWWLQL,QF

5(3257,1*3(5,2',QFHSWLRQWKURXJK)HEUXDU\

 ([([SHQVH6XPPDU\

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 197-21 Filed: 03/31/22 Page 31 of 31 PageID #:3845