You are on page 1of 14
OOM SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet May-31-2018 10:22 am Case Number: CGC-17-562144 Filing Date: May-29-2018 10:20 Filed by: EDNALEEN ALEGRE Image: 06356529 RECORD REMANDED BACK TO SUPERIOR COURT ANDREW BAKER VS. DYNAMIC LEDGER SOLUTIONS, INC. ET AL 001006356529 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF SAN FRANCiveg NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA mY 29 450 Golden Gate Avenue am San Francisco, CA 94102 ‘www cand.uscouris gov ‘Susan Y, Soong. (Clerk of Court 415-522-2000 May 23, 2018 San Francisco County Superior Court Civic Center Courthouse 400 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94102 RE: Andrew Baker, t al. v. Dynamic Ledger Solutions, Inc., et al. Your Case Number: CGC-17-562144 Dear Clerk, Pursuant to an order remanding the above captioned case to your court, transmitted herewith are: (X) Certified copies of docket entries (X) Certified copies of Remand Order () Other Please acknowledge receipt of the above documents on the attached copy of this letter. Case Systetyfs Administrator (415) 522-2087 Northern District of California wok wen Case 3:17-cv-06850-RS Document 34 Filed 04/19/18 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. CF. Case te COS (T- ANDREW BAKER, et al., Sup 2 5 Plaintiffs, | Case No. 17-cv-06850-I v, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND. DYNAMIC LEDGER SOLUTIONS, INC., etal, Defendants. 1. INTRODUCTION On February 1, 2018, this action was stayed pending the issuance of a Supreme Court decision relevant to determining whether Plaintiff Andrew Baker's motion to remand should be granted. See Dkt. No. 18. The Supreme Court’s decision has issued, see Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver Coy Emp. 's Ret. Fund, et al., 138 8. Ct. 1061 (2018), and Baker now renews his motion. Defendant Dynat no longer opposes remand, However, Arman Anvati, the ic Ledger Solutions, Inc. (“DL lead plaintiff in the related consolidated action also before this court (In re Tezos Securities Litigation, No. 17-cv-6779), does oppose Baker's motion.' Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), this matter is suitable for disposition without oral argument and the hearing set for April 26, 2018 is vacated. For the reasons that follow, Baker's motion is granted and this case is remanded to San Francisco Superior Court. ' Anvari has also filed a motion in the consolidated action to stay Baker (i.¢., to enjoin the state court from proceeding with the case) in the event it is remanded. See In re Tezos Secs. Litig., No. 17-cv-6679 (Dkt. No. 109). That motion is not yet ripe and will be ruled on ata later date. CPi