On March 21, 2018 a
Conference
was filed
involving a dispute between
Song, Ingeun,
and
Arias, Diana,
Cao, Yi,
China International Capital Corporation Hong Kong Securities Limited,
Citigroup Global Markets Inc.,
Credit Suisse Securities,
Du, Li,
Li, Shilei,
Luo, Min,
Lv, Lianzhu,
Morgan Stanley & Co., International Plc,
Needham & Company, Llc,
Nicolaus & Company, Inc,
Nomura Securities International, Inc.,
Qudian, Inc.,
Shu, Chao,
Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc.,
Ubs Securities Llc,
Yeung, Carl,
Zhu, Tianyu,
for (28) Complex Unlimited Securities Litigation
in the District Court of San Mateo County.
Preview
DEPUTY OLERK
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
COIVIPLEX CIVIL LITIGATION
INGEUN SONG, individually and on Case No. 18 CIV 01425
behalf of all others similarly situated, CLASS ACTION
Plaintiffs, Assigned for All Purposes to
Department 21, Hon. Robert D. Foiles
vs.
ORDER REASSIGNING COMPLEX
QUDIAN INC, et al., CASE FOR ALL PURPOSES and
SETTING OF CASE
Defendants. MANAGEMENT AND TRIAL
/ SETTING CONFERENCE
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, as follows:
Effective immediately, pursuant to San Mateo County Superior Court Local Rule
3.200, the above-entitled matter is REASSIGNED for all purposes to the Honorable
Robert D. Foiles in Department 21, located at Courtroom 2L 400 County Center,
Redwood City, California.
The Status Conference set for May 17, 2021 is VACATED. This complex action
is set for Complex Status Conference in Department 21 on Friday, May l4, 2021 at 2:00
p.m. Appearances shall be remote only, using Zoom.
Assigned Department Information: To schedule a Law and Motion Hearing,
please see Local Rule 3.402 or visit the assigned Judicial Ofcer’s webpage at
www.sanmateocourt.orgiciviljudges. Contact information for your assigned department
is as follows:
Department 21 Phone: (650) 26 1 -5 121
Department E—Mail: dept21@sanmateocourt.org
Complex Case E-Mail: complexcivil@sanmateocourt.org
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows:
1. Electronic Service. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section
1010.6(0), and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.253(c) and Rule 2.251(0), all parties and
their counsel shall serve all documents electronically, and accept service of documents
electronically from all other parties, in conformity with Code of Civil Procedure Section
1010.6 and the California Rules of Court, except when personal service is required by
statute. Counsel for the parties shall meet and confer, agree upon, and keep updated, an
e—service list for this complex civil action. The parties are reminded that electronic
service of documents may extend time periods for response by two (2) court days,
I
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1010.6(a)(4)(B).
2. Mandatory E-Filing. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section
1010.6(0), all parties shall le all documents electronically in this complex civil action,
except those documents identied in Local Rule 2.1.8. Presently, the following
documents must still be led/lodged in hardcopy paper:
Ex Parte Motions and Oppositions thereto
Stipulation and Proposed Order
Proposed Judgments
Abstract of Judgment
Appeal Documents, including Notice of Appeal
Administrative Records
The document (other than exhibits) must be text searchable. Please visit
www.sanmateocourt.org for further information on e-ling. Please note that exhibits to
an); electronically led briefs, declarations or other documents must be electronically
“bookmarked” as required by CRC Rule 3.1 1 10(t)(4).
l
3. Courtesy Copies for Assigned Department. In the future, a courtesy
copy of all pleadings, motions, applications, briefs, and any and all other papers led in
this complex case shall be electronically served upon the assigned Civil Judge and
Department by email only at email address complexcivil@sanmateocourt.org AND
dept21@sanmateocourt.org. Please add complexcivil@,sanmateocourt.org AND
dept21@sanmateocourt.org to your e-service list in this complex case as to any and all
papers led with the Court. A11 motions and briefs shall conform with the California
Rules of Court, especially Rule 3.1 l l3, and indicate on the caption page that this
matter is assigned for all purposes to Department 21.
4. Electronic Correspondence to Assigned Department. Correspondence
to the Department of the assigned Civil Judge, such as requests to take matters o‘
calendar and requests for rescheduling, regarding complex civil actions shall be
submitted electronically, rather than paper, by e-mail addressed to
complexcivil@sanmateocourt.org AND dept21@,sanmateocourt.org. All e-
correspondence must be sent in at least 12 point type. This email address is for the
Department of the assigned Civil Judge to receive correspondence regarding complex
civil cases, and is not a venue for back-and-forth communications with the judge.
Communications to this email address are not part of the ocial court les —
just like a
paper letter, they are not “led” documents — and will be retained for at least 30 days and
then be subject to deletion (destruction) thereafter.
5. Mandatory Email Header. All communications to the
complexcivil@sanmateocourt.org email address MUST include in the header “subject
line” the Case Number and Name of Case (e.g., CIV 654321 Smith v. Jones) and the
name of the assigned judge (e.g., Judge Foiles).
6. Ex Parte Motions. Presently, due to the Covid l9 Pandemic, no in-
— until further order of the court — and
person ex parte appearances are permitted any ex
parte appearances must be pre-schedule with the Department of the assigned Civil Judge
and pre-organized by the moving party remote appearance by all involved parties and
for
the Court. Ex parte applications in this matter shall heard by Department 21 , on
Tuesdays and Thursdays at 1:30 p.m., and the parties must meet the requirements of
CRC Rule 3. 120 et seq.. With the consent of counsel for all parties, telephone
conferences on simple interim case management matters may be scheduled with the Court
for a mutually convenient time and date — with the scheduling and logistics of such
telephone conferences to be the responsibility of the requesting party/parties.
7. E-Service of Discovery. All discovery methods (C.C.P. § 2019.010),
including but not limited to notice of deposition, special interrogatories, form
interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and requests for admissions, shall
be served electronically upon counsel for the parties. All discovery responses by a party
in response to a discovery method by another party shall be served electronically upon
counsel for the parties. Production of documents shall be provided in electronic form,
unless the parties agree otherwise in writing. If not previously established, counsel for
the parties shall meet and confer regarding possible establishment of a joint electronic
document depository for the uploading and downloading of electronic document
productions.
8. Informal Discovery Conferences.
a. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 2016.080, and the
authority of a complex civil judge under CRC Rule 3 .750, no party may move to compel
discovery, or le any other discovery motion, until the parties have had an Informal
Discovery Conference. Counsel must have exhausted all meet and confer obligations
before the Informal Discovery Conference.
b. Any party requesting an Informal Discovery Conference shall
comply with Local Rule 3.700, and schedule the IDC with the Civil Commissioner.
9. Limit to 35. Given the nature of this complex civil action, the Court
views document production and depositions as the most effective means of discovery for
adjudication. Accordingly, no party may propound more than 35 special interrogatories
total and no party may propound more than 35 requests for admissions (other than as to
the authenticity of documents) total, without prior court order after demonstration of need
and a showing that other means of discovery would be less efcient.
10. No Appendix of Non-California Authorities. Pursuant to CRC Rule
3.1 l 13(i), the Complex Civil Department, Dept. 2, does not require any appendix of non-
California authorities, unless specically stated by the Court as to a particular motion.
11. Status Conference. In anticipation of the Case Management and Trial
Setting Conference, counsel for the parties should be prepared to discuss at the hearing
and le and serve written Status Conference statements (in prose and details, not using
the standardized Judicial Council form) with a courtesy copy emailed to
complexcivil(@sanmateocourt.org AND dept21@sanmateocourt.org at least ve court
days prior to the Conference, as to the following:
a. Status of Settlement or Mediation;
b. Status of the related New York class action;
c. Whether the stay of this case should remain or be lifted;
d. hAny anticipated motions and proposed brieng schedule; and
e. Any other matters for which the parties seek Court ruling or scheduling.
W
DATED: February 4, 2021 i 7:»
E
3"? F7
HON. LELAND DAVIS 111
PRESIDING JUDGE of the SUPERIOR COURT
SERVICE LIST
Song v. Qudian, 1 8CIVO 1426
as of January 2021
Attorneys for Plaintiffs:
LAURENCE ROSEN
THE ROSEN LAW FLRM PA
275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor
New York City, NY 100 1 6
(212) 686—1060
lrosen@rosen1ega1.com
HNG CHEN
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM PA
101 Greenwood Avenue, Suite 440
Jenkintown, PA 19046
(215) 600-2817
jchen@rosenlegal.com
Attorneys for Defendants:
JAMES KREISSMAN Specially Appearing Defendant Qudian Inc.:
STEPHEN BLAKE
BO BRIAN JIN
SIMPSON THACHER
& BARTLETT LLP
2475 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA 94304
(650) 251-5000
jkreissman@stblaw.com
sblake@stblaw.com
ban.jin@stblaw.com
MATTHEW CLOSE Specially Appearing Defendants Credit
O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP Suisse, Citigroup, Nomura Securities,
400 South Hope Street, 18th Floor Stifel Nicolaus & C0,, and Needham & Co.
Los Angeles, CA 90071
(213) 430-6000
mclose omm.com