Reported Decisions

Reported Decisions Before Ninth Circuit Where Are Counsel of Record

Jerry Beeman & Pharm. Servs. v. Anthem Prescription Mgmt., LLC, No. 07-56692, No. 07-56693, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14687, March 8, 2011, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California, July 19, 2011, Filed

Beeman v. TDI Managed Care Servs., No. 04-56369, No. 04-56384 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 449 F.3d 1035; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 13764, April 3, 2006, Argued and Submitted, Pasadena, California , June 2, 2006, Filed

Foothill Capital Corp. v. Clare’s Food Mkt. (In re Coupon Clearing Serv.), No. 95-55864, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 113 F.3d 1091; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 11714; 32 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 962; Bankr. L. Rep. (CCH) P77,411; 30 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 1105; 97 Cal. Daily Op. Service 3774; 97 Daily Journal DAR 6407, August 6, 1996, Argued, Submitted, Pasadena, California , May 20, 1997, Filed

Reported Decisions Before US District Court in California Where Are Counsel of Record

Rigo v. Kason Indus., CASE NO. 11cv64-MMA (POR), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78399, July 19, 2011, Decided, July 19, 2011, Filed

Safjr v. BBG Communs., Inc., CASE NO. 10-CV-2341 H (NLS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26407, March 15, 2011, Decided, March 15, 2011, Filed, Writ of mandamus denied BBG Communs., Inc. v. United States Dist. Court for S. Dist. of Ca. (In re BBG Communs., Inc.), 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 16516 (9th Cir. Cal., July 5, 2011)

Sajfr v. BBG Communs., Inc., CASE NO. 10-CV-2341-H (NLS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18599, February 25, 2011, Decided, February 25, 2011, Filed

Webb v. Carter’s Inc., Case No. CV 08-7367 GAF (MANx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 272 F.R.D. 489; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12597, February 3, 2011, Decided, February 3, 2011, Filed

Bailey v. Household Fin. Corp., CASE NO. 10cv857 WQH (RBB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117866, November 4, 2010, Decided, November 4, 2010, Filed

Herrington v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Cos., No. C 09-1597 CW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90505, September 1, 2010, Decided, September 1, 2010, Filed

Meaunrit v. Conagra Foods, Inc., No. C 09-02220 CRB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73599, July 20, 2010, Decided, July 20, 2010,

.In re Apple iPhone 3G Prods. Liab. Litig., NO. C 09-02045 JW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92035, May 25, 2010, Decided, May 25, 2010, FileF

Meaunrit v. Pinnacle Foods Group, LLC, No. C 09-04555 CW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43858; 71 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 624, May 5, 2010, Decided, May 5, 2010, Filed

In re Apple iPhone 3G Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL NO. C 09-02045 JW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION, 728 F. Supp. 2d 1065; 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79054, April 2, 2010, Decided, April 2, 2010, Filed

.In re NVIDIA GPU Litig., NO. C 08-04312 JW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108500, November 19, 2009, Decided, November 19, 2009, Filed

Util. Consumers’ Action Network v. Sprint Solutions, Inc., Case No. 07 CV 2231 RJB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 259 F.R.D. 484; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53055, June 23, 2009, Decided, June 23, 2009, Filed

Leyvas v. Bank of Am. Corp. (In re Countrywide Fin. Corp. Mortg. Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig.), CASE NO. 08md1988 DMS (LSP),CASE NO. 08cv1888 DMS (LSP),CASE NO. 08cv1957 DMS (LSP),CASE NO. 08cv1972 DMS (LSP), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 601 F. Supp. 2d 1201; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18227, February 5, 2009, Decided, February 5, 2009, Filed

.IATSE Local 33 Section 401(k) Plan Bd. of Trs. v. Bullock, Case No. CV 08-3949 AHM (SSx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96939; 45 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1463, November 5, 2008, Decided, November 5, 2008, Filed

Browder v. Fleetwood Enters., Case No. ED CV 07-01180 SGL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, EASTERN DIVISION, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81575, September 4, 2008, Decided, September 4, 2008, Filed

Util. Consumers’ Action Network v. Sprint Solutions, Inc., CASE NO. C07-2231RJB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121546, August 15, 2008, Decided, August 15, 2008, Filed

Util. Consumers’ Action Network v. Sprint Solutions, Inc., CASE NO. C07-2231RJB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53075, July 10, 2008, Decided, July 10, 2008, Filed

Util. Consumers’ Action Network v. Sprint Solutions, Inc., Case No. C07-CV-2231-W (RJB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34159, April 25, 2008, Decided, April 25, 2008, Filed

Util. Consumers’ Action Network & Eric Taylor v. Sprint Solutions, Inc., Case No. C07-CV-2231-W (RJB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30737, April 15, 2008, Decided, April 15, 2008, Filed

Beeman v. Anthem Prescription Mgmt., Case No. EDCV 04-407-VAP (SGLx) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39779, May 4, 2007, Decided , May 7, 2007, Filed; May 7, 2007,

Garrett v. City of Escondido, Civil No. 06CV2434 JAH (NLS) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 465 F. Supp. 2d 1043; 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93453, November 20, 2006, Decided , November 20, 2006, Filed

Util. Consumers’ Action Network v. Powernet Global Communs., PNG Telecomm., Inc., CASE NO. O6CV1773-H (RBB) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78546, October 20, 2006, Decided , October 20, 2006, Filed

Lynch v. Cal. PUC, No C-04-0580 VRW , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 311 B.R. 798; 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13808; 43 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 129, July 15, 2004, Decided , July 15, 2004, Entered in Civil Docket

Jerry Beeman & Pharm. Servs. v. TDI Managed Care Servs., Case No EDCV 02-1327- VAP(SGLX) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13207, July 10, 2004, Decided , July 12, 2004, Entered, Filed, Docketed

Lynch v. Cal. PUC, No C-04-0580 VRW , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6022; 51 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d (MB) 1722, April 9, 2004, Decided

Critney v. Nat’l City Ford, Inc., CIV. NO. 03-CV-0239 B , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 255 F. Supp. 2d 1146; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6017; 2003-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P74,175, April 2, 2003, Decided , April 3, 2003, Filed

In re Toys R Us, Inc., Privacy Litig., MDL No. M-00-1381 MMC, Master File No. C 00-2746 MMC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16947, October 9, 2001, Decided , October 9, 2001, Filed

In re Intuit Privacy Litig., Case No ED CV 00-123 RT (RCx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 138 F. Supp. 2d 1272; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5828, April 9, 2001, Decided , April 10, 2001, Entered

Schwartz v. Upper Deck Co., 96 CV 3408-B (AJB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 104 F. Supp. 2d 1228; 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11863, June 21, 2000, Decided , June 21, 2000, Filed

Schwartz v. Upper Deck Co., CIV. NO. 96 CV 3408-B (AJB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 183 F.R.D. 672; 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 575, January 12, 1999, Decided , January 12, 1999, Filed

In re Sears Auto. Ctr. Consumer Litig., No. C-92-227-RHS FMS (JSB), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23652, January 17, 1997, Decided , January 17, 1997, Filed; January 17, 1997, Entered in Civil Docket

In re Sears Auto. Ctr. Consumer Litig., No. C-92-2227-RHS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22715, October 29, 1992, Decided , October 29, 1992, Filed; November 2, 1992, Entered in Civil Docket

In re Sears Auto. Ctr. Consumer Litig., No. C-92-2227-RHS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22716, October 29, 1992, Decided , October 29, 1992, Filed

Harris v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., No. C-92-1483 JPV, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19986, June 30, 1992, Decided , July 1, 1992, Filed; July 2, 1992, Entered

Kasky v. Perrier Group of Am., CIVIL NO. 91-0489-R(M), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21177, September 14, 1991, Decided , September 16, 1991, Filed

Johnson v. Hui, No. C-90-1863 DLJ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 811 F. Supp. 479; 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20894; Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P97,207, September 4, 1991, Decided , September 5, 1991, Filed; September 9, 1991, Entered

Reported Decisions In California Supreme Court Where Are Counsel of Record

Ardon v. City of Los Angeles, S174507, SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 52 Cal. 4th 241; 2011 Cal. LEXIS 7681, July 25, 2011, Filed, Reported at Ardon (Estuardo) v. City of Los Angeles, 2011 Cal. LEXIS 8082 (Cal., July 25, 2011)(counsel for amicus UCAN)

People ex rel. Lungren v. Superior Court, No. S047833. , SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 14 Cal. 4th 294; 926 P.2d 1042; 58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 855; 1996 Cal. LEXIS 6518; 43 ERC (BNA) 1773; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 8856; 96 Daily Journal DAR 14686, December 9, 1996, Decided  .

Mangini v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. S034603. , SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 7 Cal. 4th 1057; 875 P.2d 73; 31 Cal. Rptr. 2d 358; 1994 Cal. LEXIS 3160; 1994-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P70,700; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5116; 94 Daily Journal DAR 9327, June 30, 1994, Decided

Reported Decisions In California Court of Appeal Where Are Counsel of Record

Pacific Bell Wireless, LLC v. Public Utilities Com., G034991 , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, 140 Cal. App. 4th 718; 44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 733; 2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 905; 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5399; 2006 Daily Journal DAR 7751, June 20, 2006, Filed , Modified and rehearing denied by Pacific Bell Wireless, LLC v. Public Utilities Com., 2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1060 (Cal. App. 4th Dist., July 10, 2006)

Utility Consumers Action Network v. Public Utilities Com., D042963 , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, 120 Cal. App. 4th 644; 15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 597; 2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1102; 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Service 6250; 2004 Daily Journal DAR 8458, July 12, 2004, Filed ,

Spielholz v. Superior Court, No. B131655. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, 86 Cal. App. 4th 1366; 104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 197; 2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 96; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1223; 2001 Daily Journal DAR 1541, February 8, 2001, Decided ,  Review Denied May 23, 2001, Reported at: 2001 Cal. LEXIS 3519.

Jordan v. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, No. C028340. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, 75 Cal. App. 4th 449; 89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 333; 1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 895; 99 Cal. Daily Op. Service 8161; 99 Daily Journal DAR 10369, October 1, 1999, Decided

McCabe v. Snyder, No. C028944. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT, 75 Cal. App. 4th 337; 89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 315; 1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 881; 99 Cal. Daily Op. Service 8083; 99 Daily Journal DAR 10251, September 29, 1999, Decided ,  As Modified October 21, 1999.

Lazar v. Hertz Corp., Nos. A080439, A080767. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR, 69 Cal. App. 4th 1494; 82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 368; 1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 132; 99 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1270; 99 Daily Journal DAR 1567, February 17, 1999, Decided ,  Review Denied April 28, 1999, Reported at: 1999 Cal. LEXIS 2850.

Day v. AT & T Corp., No. A076845. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, 63 Cal. App. 4th 325; 74 Cal. Rptr. 2d 55; 1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 345; 98 Cal. Daily Op. Service 2966; 98 Daily Journal DAR 4003, April 20, 1998, Decided

Mangini v. J.G. Durand International, No. A065120. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, 31 Cal. App. 4th 214; 37 Cal. Rptr. 2d 153; 1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1313; 95 Cal. Daily Op. Service 113; 95 Daily Journal DAR 69, December 29, 1994, Decided

Harris v. Chase Manhattan Bank, No. A060791., COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION TWO, 34 Cal. App. 4th 1563; 35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 733; 1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1165; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 8761; 94 Daily Journal DAR 16189, November 17, 1994, Decided ,  Review ordered on court’s own motion February 23, 1995 (S044161).

Kuykendall v. State Bd. of Equalization, No. D019620. , No. D020023. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, 22 Cal. App. 4th 1194; 27 Cal. Rptr. 2d 783; 1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 153; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1364; 93 Daily Journal DAR 2342, February 22, 1994, Decided ,  Review Denied May 12, 1994, Reported at: 1994 Cal. LEXIS 2521.

Caro v. Procter & Gamble Co., No. D016720. , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE, 18 Cal. App. 4th 644; 22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 419; 1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 900; 93 Cal.

.Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. A059253., COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, 22 Cal. App. 4th 628; 21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 232; 1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 728; 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5380; 93 Daily Journal DAR 9083, July 14, 1993, Decided ,  NOT CITABLE – SUPERSEDED BY GRANT OF REVIEW ,  Review Granted September 30, 1993 (S034603), Reported at: 1993 Cal. LEXIS 5270.

Gallin v. Superior Court, No. D013850 , Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, 230 Cal. App. 3d 541; 281 Cal. Rptr. 304; 1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 532; 91 Daily Journal DAR 6234, May 10, 1991 ,  Certified for Publication May 24, 1991.

Bradley v. First Health Servs. Corp., B185672, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, 2007 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1625, February 28, 2007, Filed ,

BRADLEY v. EXPRESS SCRIPTS, INC., B181762, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION EIGHT, 2006 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 5913, July 6, 2006, Filed ,

Keel v. Bmg Entm’t, B164476 , COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE, 2003 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 11188; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P28,711, November 26, 2003, Filed ,

Reported Out of State Cases Where Are Counsel of Record

Date v. Sony Elecs., Inc., Case No. 07-cv-15474, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96870, September 16, 2010, Decided, September 16, 2010, Filed

Date v. Sony Elecs., Inc., Case Number:07-15474, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15837, February 20, 2009, Decided, February 20, 2009

In re Broadcast.Com, Inc. Privacy Litig., Master File NO.. 2:00CV18-TJW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, MARSHALL DIVISION, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26212, December 11, 2001, Decided, December 12, 2001, Filed

In re Toys R Us, Inc., Privacy Litig., MDL No. M-00-1381 MMC, Master File No. C 00-2746 MMC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16947, October 9, 2001, Decided , October 9, 2001, Filed

Chance v. Ave. A, Inc., CASE NO. C00-1964C, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, SEATTLE DIVISION, 165 F. Supp. 2d 1153; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17503, September 14, 2001, Decided , September 14, 2001, Filed; September 17, 2001, Entered

Sherwood v. Microsoft Corp., NO. 3:99-1191, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE, NASHVILLE DIVISION, 91 F. Supp. 2d 1196; 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2780; 2000-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P72,830, February 22, 2000, Decided , February 22, 2000, Entered

In re FORD MOTOR CO. IGNITION SWITCH PRODS. LIAB. LITIG. v. FORD MOTOR CO., Civil Action No. 96-3125 (JBS), 96-1814 (JBS), 96-3198 (JBS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24064; 51 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 569, September 30, 1997, Decided , September 30, 1997, Filed

In re FORD MOTOR CO. IGNITION SWITCH PRODS. LIAB. LITIG. v. FORD MOTOR CO., MDL No. 1112, Civil Action No. 96-3125 (JBS) [THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ALL CASES], Civil Action No. 96-1814 (JBS), No. 96-3198 (JBS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY, 174 F.R.D. 332; 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13071, August 28, 1997, Decided , August 28, 1997, Original Filed

In re Ford Motor Co. Ignition Switch Prods. Liab. Litig. v. Ford Motor Co., MDL No. 1112 Civil Action No. 96-3125 (JBS), [THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ALL CASES], Civil Action No. 96-1814 (JBS), No. 96-3198 (JBS), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23996, August 28, 1997, Decided , August 28, 1997, Filed

Marcus v. AT&T Corp., 95 Civ. 9765 (MBM), 96 Civ. 0088 (MBM), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, 938 F. Supp. 1158; 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12313, August 21, 1996, Decided , August 23, 1996, FILED

Alvarado Partners, L.P. v. Mehta, CIVIL Action No. 88-B-0781, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO, 130 F.R.D. 673; 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6111; 17 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 319; Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P95,271, May 14, 1990 ,  May 14, 1990, Filed

Supnick v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. C00-0221P, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7073, May 18, 2000, Decided , May 19, 2000, Filed, Entered

Reported Decisions Where Are Identified As A Counsel of Record But No Active Participation

SCHADE v. HAMBRECHT & QUIST GROUP, G024539, G024540, G024541, COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE, 2002 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1611, May 29, 2002, Filed ,

Kagan v. Carwell Corp., Case No.: CV-01-00852 CAS (CWx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4544, March 30, 2001, Decided , March 30, 2001, Filed; April 2, 2001, Entered

Stuart v. Household Retail Servs., SA CV 99-987 AHS (EEx) , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22509, December 14, 2000, Decided , December 14, 2000, Filed; December 15, 2000, Entered

Stationary Eng’rs Local 39 Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc., No. C-97-01519 DLJ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8302; 1998-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P72,167, April 30, 1998, Decided , April 30, 1998, FILED

In re Epogen & Aranesp Off-Label Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., MDL 08-1934 PSG (AGRx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 590 F. Supp. 2d 1282; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105233, December 17, 2008, Decided, December 17, 2008, Filed, (also other related decisions)

In re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration Mktg., Sales Practices, & Prods. Liab. Litig., Case No. 8:10ML 02151 JVS (FMOx), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, 754 F. Supp. 2d 1145; 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131330; 73 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 317, November 30, 2010, Decided, November 30, 2010 (also other related decisions)

In re GMC Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Prods. Liab. Litig., NOS. 96-2039, 96-2054, 96-2061, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, 134 F.3d 133; 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 791, July 25, 1997, Argued , January 14, 1998, Filed

In re Checking Account Overdraft Litig. v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., CASE NO. 09-MD-02036-JLK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, MIAMI DIVISION, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66669, June 3, 2011, Decided, June 3, 2011, (also other related decisions)

In re Enfamil Lipil Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 2222, JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION, 764 F. Supp. 2d 1356; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12660, February 9, 2011, Filed (also other related decisions)

In re Countrywide Fin. Corp. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., CASE NO: 3:08-MD-01998,MDL No. 1998, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY, LOUISVILLE DIVISION, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131775, December 13, 2010, Decided, December 13, 2010, Filed (also other related decisions)

In re Light Cigarettes Mktg. Sales Practices Litig., 1:09-md-02068-JAW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE, 751 F. Supp. 2d 205; 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124261, November 22, 2010, Decided, November 22, 2010, Filed (also other related decisions)