Maxwell v. Amazon.com Inc

1 The Honorable Barbara J. Rothstein 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE MARIA ALBANO, TERRENCE BOYD, CLARINDA BYRD, TRAVIS CLEVINGER, TAMMIE GREEN, MAYHUGH HORNE, No. 2:25-cv-00252-BJR MELISSA JARAMILLO, KEITH JOHNSON, DAVID KAPLAN, DANIEL KILGO, CURSILA STIPULATED MOTION TO LONGORIA, LUIS RAMOS, ADRIEN CONSOLIDATE AND EXTEND RODRIGUEZ, GILBERTO ROMAGNOLO, DEADLINES AND ORDER BRENDA SHALEY, ROBERT SMITH, ROBERT TAYLOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware corporation, and AMAZON ADVERTISING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, 19 Defendants.

20 CASSAUNDRA MAXWELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 21 No. 2:25-cv-00261-BJR Plaintiff, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware corporation, and AMAZON ADVERTISING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendants.

STIP. & ORDER TO SET COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1 Plaintiffs in the above captioned cases and Defendants Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon Advertising, LLC stipulate as follows: 3 1. On February 7, 2025, Plaintiffs Maria Albano, Terrence Boyd, Clarinda Byrd, Travis Clevinger, Tammie Green, Mayhugh Horne, Melissa Jaramillo, Keith Johnson, David Kaplan, Daniel Kilgo, Cursila Longoria, Luis Ramos, Adrien Rodriguez, Gilberto Romagnolo, Brenda Shaley, Robert Smith, and Robert Taylor filed their complaint against Defendants. Albano v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2:25-cv-00252-BJR (W.D. Wash.), Dkt. No. 1. Days later, on February 10, 2025, Plaintiff Cassaundra Maxwell filed her complaint against the same two Defendants raising similar allegations. Maxwell v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2:25-cv-00261-BJR (W.D. Wash.), Dkt. No. 1.

10 2. The Albano and Maxwell actions (the “Related Cases”) have both been assigned to The Honorable Barbara J. Rothstein.

12 3. On February 11, 2025, Plaintiff Maxwell filed a Notice of Related Cases identifying the Albano action. Maxwell, 2:25-cv-00261-BJR (W.D. Wash.), Dkt. No. 4.

14 4. Plaintiffs in the Related Cases have held discussions regarding consolidation.

15 5. Consolidation of the Related Cases is appropriate because Plaintiffs agree that the Related Cases are based on the same subject matter, arise from the same nucleus of operative facts, assert similar causes of action, define similar and overlapping classes, allege similar wrongful conduct, and seek similar remedies. Further, similar discovery and class certification issues will be relevant to the Related Cases. As a result, consolidation will conserve judicial resources and reduce the time and cost of trying the cases separately. See, e.g., In re Valve Antitrust Litig., 2024 21 WL 5009034, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 6, 2024) (ruling that “given the sole defendant and overlapping factual and legal issues, consolidation will promote judicial economy, ensure consistent results, and streamline matters overall”); Burton-Curl v. Seattle Coll. Dist. S. Campus, 2023 WL 3004063, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 19, 2023) (“In determining whether consolidation is warranted, courts evaluate the existence of common questions of law or fact and weigh the interests of judicial economy against any delay or prejudice that might result.”). See also Pierce v. Cnty. of STIP. & ORDER TO SET COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. Orange, 526 F.3d 1190, 1203 (9th Cir. 2008) (noting district courts’ broad discretion to consolidate actions).

3 6. Following consolidation, Plaintiffs’ counsel in the Related Cases intend to file a Consolidated Amended Complaint.

5 7. Accordingly, the Parties agree that rather than responding to each Complaint in the Related Cases, Defendants should respond to the Consolidated Amended Complaint, once filed.

7 As a result, the Parties jointly move the Court for an Order as follows: 8 • The above captioned actions shall be consolidated as In re Amazon Ads SDK 9 Litigation, No. 2:25-cv-00252-BJR (W.D. Wash); 10 • Plaintiffs shall file a Consolidated Amended Complaint on or before June 30, 11 2025; 12 • Defendants will respond to the Consolidated Amended Complaint within 45 days 13 after the filing of the Consolidated Amended Complaint; 14 • If Defendants respond by way of motion to dismiss, Plaintiffs shall file an 15 opposition to the motion to dismiss within 45 days of the motion; Defendants 16 shall have 21 days to file a reply.

DATED: April 14, 2025 COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP 20 By: /s/ Thomas E. Loeser Thomas E. Loeser, WSBA #38701 /s/ Karin B. Swope 22 Karin B. Swope, WSBA #24015 1809 7th Avenue, Suite 1610 23 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206)-802-1272 24 Facsimile: (206)-299-4184 [email protected] 25 [email protected] 26 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Maria Albano, Terrence Boyd, Clarinda Byrd, Travis Clevinger, STIP. & ORDER TO SET COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1 Tammie Green, Mayhugh Horne, Melissa Jaramillo, Keith Johnson, David Kaplan, Daniel 2 Kilgo, Cursila Longoria, Luis Ramos, Adrien Rodriguez, Gilberto Romagnolo, Brenda Shaley, 3 Robert Smith, and Robert Taylor 4 KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 5 By: /s/ Derek W. Loeser Derek W. Loeser, WSBA #24274 /s/ Cari Campen Laufenberg 7 Cari Campen Laufenberg, WSBA #34354 8 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3400 Seattle, WA 98101-3268 9 Telephone: (206) 623-1900 Facsimile: (206) 623-3384 10 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] /s/ Christopher L. Springer 12 Christopher L. Springer (Pro Hac Vice) 13 801 Garden Street, Suite 301 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 14 Telephone: (805) 456-1496 Facsimile: (805) 456-1497 15 Email: [email protected] 16 Attorneys for Plaintiff Cassaundra Maxwell 17 PERKINS COIE LLP 18 By: /s/ Ryan Spear Ryan Spear, WSBA #39974 /s/ Nicola Menaldo 20 Nicola Menaldo, WSBA #44459 21 /s/ Erin K. Earl Erin K. Earl, WSBA #49341 /s/ Jordan C. Harris 23 Jordan C. Harris, WSBA #55499 24 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 25 Telephone: (206) 359-8000 Fax: (206) 359-9000 26 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] STIP. & ORDER TO SET COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants Amazon.com, Inc. 3 and Amazon Advertising, LLC

STIP. & ORDER TO SET COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. ORDER Having reviewed the Parties’ stipulation, and finding good cause exists for the requested relief, the Court hereby GRANTS the stipulation and establishes the following schedule: 5 1. The above captioned actions shall be consolidated as In re Amazon Ads SDK Litigation, No. 2:25-cv-00252-BJR (W.D. Wash); 2. Plaintiffs shall file a Consolidated Amended Complaint on or before June 30, 2025; 3. Defendants will respond to the Consolidated Amended Complaint within 45 days after the filing of the Consolidated Amended Complaint; 4. If Defendants respond by way of motion to dismiss, Plaintiffs shall file an opposition to the motion to dismiss within 45 days of the motion; Defendant shall have 21 days to file a reply.

The Clerk of the Court is hereby notified of this consolidation.

17 IT IS SO ORDERED.

18 DATED this 14th day of April, 2025.

20 A THE HONORABLE BARBARA J. ROTHSTEIN 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

STIP. & ORDER TO SET COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.