Court filing
Declaration of Shawn M. Kennedy — Plaid Privacy (Dkt. 88.1)
Filed May 4, 2020 in Plaid Privacy; one of 174 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2020-05-04 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · No. 4:20-cv-03056-DMR · Doc. 88-1 · 2020-05-04 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
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 KENNEDY DECL. ISO OPPOSITION TO ADMIN MOTION TO CONTINUE CMC CASE NO. 4:20-CV-03056-DMR HERRERA PURDY LLP Shawn M. Kennedy (SBN 218472) skennedy@herrerapurdy.com Andrew M. Purdy (SBN 261912) apurdy@herrerapurdy.com Bret D. Hembd (SBN 272826) bhembd@herrerapurdy.com 4590 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 500 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tel: (949) 936-0900 Fax: (855) 969-2050 HERRERA PURDY LLP Nicomedes Sy Herrera (SBN 275332) nherrera@herrerapurdy.com Laura E. Seidl (SBN 269891) lseidl@herrerapurdy.com 1300 Clay Street, Suite 600 Oakland, CA 94612 Tel: (510) 422-4700 Fax: (855) 969-2050 LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Rachel Geman (Pro Hac Vice) rgeman@lchb.com Rhea Ghosh (Pro Hac Vice) rghosh@lchb.com 250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10013-1413 Tel: (212) 355-9500 Fax: (212) 355-9592 Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Michael W. Sobol (SBN 194857) msobol@lchb.com Melissa Gardner (SBN 289096) mgardner@lchb.com 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Tel: (415) 956-1000 Fax: (415) 956-1008 BURNS CHAREST LLP Warren T. Burns (Pro Hac Vice) wburns@burnscharest.com Russell Herman (Pro Hac Vice) rherman@burnscharest.com 900 Jackson Street, Suite 500 Dallas, TX 75202 Tel: (469) 904-4550 Fax: (469) 444-5002 BURNS CHAREST LLP Christopher J. Cormier (Pro Hac Vice) ccormier@burnscharest.com 4725 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20016 Tel: (202) 577-3977 Fax: (469) 444-5002 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION IN RE PLAID INC. PRIVACY LITIGATION Master Docket No.: 4:20-cv-03056-DMR DECLARATION OF SHAWN M. KENNEDY IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT PLAID INC.’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Hon. Donna M. Ryu Action Filed: May 4, 2020 Trial Date: None Set THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ALL ACTIONS Case 4:20-cv-03056-DMR Document 88-1 Filed 09/18/20 Page 1 of 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 - 1 - KENNEDY DECL. ISO OPPOSITION TO ADMIN MOTION TO CONTINUE CMC CASE NO. 4:20-CV-03056-DMR I, SHAWN M. KENNEDY, hereby declare as follows: 1. I am a partner of the law firm of Herrera Purdy LLP (“HP”), interim co-lead class counsel for Plaintiffs in the above-captioned action. I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of California and am admitted to practice before this Court. I have personal knowledge of the statements contained in this declaration and, if called to testify, I could and would testify competently to them. I submit this declaration in support of the Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Administrative Motion to Continue Case Management Conference. 2. Contrary to the statements in Plaid’s administrative motion, Plaintiffs did not state generally that it would be “inefficient for the Court to hold a CMC while there is uncertainty,” but rather that it would be inefficient to do so “while there is uncertainty as to whether additional plaintiffs will be consolidated in this action.” ECF No. 54 at 2 (emphasis added). That is, Plaintiffs sought to continue the CMC until 21 days after they filed their consolidated complaint because, at the time of that filing, the parties had filed a stipulation to consolidate the related actions pending in this District, but the Court had not yet issued an order consolidating those actions. It therefore would have been inefficient to hold a CMC in the lead case while it was still uncertain whether the other actions would be consolidated with it. 3. Plaid opposed Plaintiffs’ earlier administrative motion, taking the position that Plaintiffs’ requested continuance was too short—Plaid instead wanted the CMC continued until after the Court ruled on its yet-to-be-filed motion to dismiss. ECF No. 55 at 2-3. 4. Plaid’s instant administrative motion renews its request to continue the CMC until after the Court rules on its motion to dismiss, this time explicitly acknowledging its desire to avoid its discovery obligations. ECF No. 83 at 3. * * * I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 18th day of September, 2020, in Newport Beach, California. /s/ Shawn M. Kennedy Shawn M. Kennedy Case 4:20-cv-03056-DMR Document 88-1 Filed 09/18/20 Page 2 of 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 - OPPOSITION TO ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE CASE NO. 4:20-CV-03056-DMR Filer’s Attestation Pursuant to General Order No. 45, § X(B), I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from Shawn Kennedy. Dated: September 18, 2020 /s/ Rachel Geman Rachel Geman LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Case 4:20-cv-03056-DMR Document 88-1 Filed 09/18/20 Page 3 of 3
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cand.359040.88.1.pdf
- Size
- 28,425 bytes
- SHA-256
- 8bd234e82c170eff1d01a21f205842b20e1f880191c87957f6b90a8cbca3c1bd
- Original
- PACER (login required)