Free Remark - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 3:05-cv-02669-MHP Document 39-4 Case 1:05-cv-00773-JJF Document 22-1

Filed 01/12/2006 Filed 07/22/2005

Page 1 of 3 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

MARIO N. ALIOTO, ESQ. (SB# 56433) TRUMP, ALIOTO, TRUMP & PRESCOTT, LLP 2280 Union Street San Francisco, CA 94123 Telephone: (415) 563-7200 Facsimile: (415) 346-0679 Joseph M. Patane (SB# 72202) LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH M. PATANE 2280 Union Street San Francisco, CA 94123 Telephone: (415) 563-7200 Facsimile: (415) 346-0679 Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID E. LIPTON, et al., on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. INTEL CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, et al. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. C:05-2669 (MHP)

MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

Pursuant to Local Rule 3-12(b), plaintiff Lawrence Lang, plaintiff in Lang v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2957 (MEJ) (N.D. Cal., filed July 20, 2005) ("Lang") hereby notifies the Court and all counsel of their belief that the following are "related cases" within the meaning of Local Rule 312(a): (1) Lang; (2) Brauch v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2743 (BZ) (N.D. Cal., filed July 5, 2005) ("Brauch"); (3) Konieczka v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2700 (MHP) (N.D. Cal., filed June 30, 2005) ("Konieczka"); (4) Prohias v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2699 (JL) (N.D. Cal., filed June 30, 2005) ("Prohias"); (5) Niehaus v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2720 (JCS) (N.D. Cal., filed July 1, 2005) ("Niehaus"); (6) Hamilton v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2721 (JCS) (N.D. Cal., filed July 1, 2005) 1
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

Case 3:05-cv-02669-MHP Document 39-4 Case 1:05-cv-00773-JJF Document 22-1

Filed 01/12/2006 Filed 07/22/2005

Page 2 of 3 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

("Hamilton"); (7) Baxley v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2758 (EMC) (N.D. Cal., filed July 6, 2005) ("Baxley"); (8) Lipton v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2669 (MHP) (N.D. Cal., filed June 29, 2005) ("Lipton"); (9) Frazier v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2813 (JL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 11, 2005) ("Frazier"); (10) Dickerson v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2818 (JL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 11, 2005) ("Dickerson"); (11) The Harman Press v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2823 (EDL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 11, 2005) ("Harman"); (12) Shanghai 1930 Restaurant Partners, L.P. v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2830 (EDL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 12, 2005) ("Shanghai"); (13) Major League Softball, Inc. v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2831 (EDL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 12, 2005) ("MLS"); (14) Allanoff v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2834 (MHP) (N.D. Cal., filed July 12, 2005) ("Allanoff"); (15) Law Offices of Laurel Stanley v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2858 (EDL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 13, 2005) ("Stanley"); (16) Lazio Family Products v. Intel Corp., C:05-2859 (WHA) (N.D. Cal., filed July 13, 2005) ("Lazio"); (17) Walker v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2882 (MEJ) (N.D. Cal., filed July 14, 2005) ("Walker"); and (18) Stoltz v. Intel Corp., No. C:05-2897 (EDL) (N.D. Cal., filed July 15, 2005) ("Stoltz"). This administrative motion is made on the grounds that the plaintiffs in Brauch, Konieczka, Prohias, Niehaus, Hamilton, Baxley, Lipton, Frazier, Dickerson, Harman, Shanghai, MLS, Allanoff, Stanley, Lazio, Walker, Stoltz and Lang filed substantially similar class action complaints against the same defendant, Intel Corporation ("Intel"), and allege essentially the same antitrust conduct. Relating these eighteen cases pursuant to Local Rule 3-12 will advance the convenience of the parties, witnesses and counsel, will avoid the risk of duplicative or inconsistent rulings, orders and judgments and will serve the interests of justice. Based on the foregoing, the undersigned respectfully request the assignment of these actions to a single judge. Dated: July 22, 2005 By: /s/ Mario N. Alioto Mario N. Alioto (SB# 56433) TRUMP, ALIOTO, TRUMP & PRESCOTT 2280 Union Street San Francisco, CA 94123 Telephone: (415) 563-7200 Facsimile: (415) 346-0679

2
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED

Case 3:05-cv-02669-MHP Document 39-4 Case 1:05-cv-00773-JJF Document 22-1

Filed 01/12/2006 Filed 07/22/2005

Page 3 of 3 Page 3 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 3

Joseph M. Patane (SB# 72202) LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH M. PATANE 2280 Union Street San Francisco, CA 94123 Telephone: (415) 563-7200 Facsimile: (415) 346-0679 Attorneys for Plaintiff

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED