Court filing

Proposed Order — In re Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation (Dkt. 49-4, N.D. Cal. No. 4:20-cv-03056)

Summary

Document 49-4 is a [Proposed] Order Granting Anderson Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related, filed 07/17/20 in Cottle and Schoeneman v. Plaid Inc., Case No. 4:20-cv-03056-DMR (N.D. Cal., San Francisco Division as captioned). The proposed text identifies Carrie Anderson, Brian McCrudden and Jeffrey Schwedock as the Anderson Plaintiffs and says their motion was filed with the Court on July 17, 2020. It would grant the motion and order that Anderson, et al. v. Plaid, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-04480, be related to Cottle v. Plaid, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-3056. It is a two-page form with a blank date and a signature line for Honorable Donna M. Ryu, United States Magistrate Judge.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Filed July 17, 2020 in In re Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation; one of 285 filings from this case.

Record facts

Court	U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Filed	2020-07-17

Cite this document

“Proposed Order — In re Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation (Dkt. 49-4, N.D. Cal. No. 4:20-cv-03056).” U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 4:20-cv-03056-DMR, Doc. 49-4, filed 2020-07-17. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-plaid-privacy-cand-359040/2020-07-17-gov-uscourts-cand-359040-49-4-gov-uscourts-cand-359040-49-4/, SHA-256 e26371d7d4d738f4fdf3db4b1691899f3072553984a060c4a9249fa59e61f095.

Search CourtListener for this docket number

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 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER GRANTING ADMIN. MOT TO RELATE 
CASES 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 
 
JAMES COTTLE AND FREDERICK 
SCHOENEMAN, on behalf of 
themselves and all others similarly 
situated, 
 
 
 
Plaintiffs, 
 
 
v. 
 
PLAID INC., a Delaware corporation, 
 
 
 
Defendant. 
Case No.: 4:20-cv-03056 
 
 
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 
ANDERSON PLAINTIFFS’ 
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 
CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD 
BE RELATED  
 
 
CLASS ACTION 
 
 
Case 4:20-cv-03056-DMR     Document 49-4     Filed 07/17/20     Page 1 of 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 
 
 
 
 
ORDER GRANTING ADMIN. MOT TO RELATE 
CASES 
 
 
Plaintiffs Carrie Anderson, Brian McCrudden and Jeffrey Schwedock’s (the “Anderson” 
Plaintiffs) Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related was filed with 
this Court on July 17, 2020, and the Court having considered the papers and pleadings on file, and 
good cause appearing therefor, hereby GRANTS the Anderson Plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion 
to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related.  
IT IS ORDERED that the Anderson Plaintiffs’ action, Anderson, et al. v. Plaid, Inc., No. 
3:20-cv-04480, be related to Cottle v. Plaid, Inc., No. 4:20-cv-3056.  
 
 
Dated:   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Honorable Donna M. Ryu 
 
 
 
 
 
 
United States Magistrate Judge  
Case 4:20-cv-03056-DMR     Document 49-4     Filed 07/17/20     Page 2 of 2

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.cand.359040.49.4.pdf
Size: 22,927 bytes
SHA-256: e26371d7d4d738f4fdf3db4b1691899f3072553984a060c4a9249fa59e61f095
Our copy: gov.uscourts.cand.359040.49.4.pdf
Original: PACER (login required)