Court filing
Proposed Order — In re Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation (Dkt. 49-4, N.D. Cal. No. 4:20-cv-03056)
Filed July 17, 2020 in In re Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation; one of 174 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2020-07-17 |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · No. 4:20-cv-03056-DMR · Doc. 49-4 · 2020-07-17 · 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 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
- Original
- PACER (login required)