Case Information
*1 JAMES E. GIBBONS ( pro hac vice )
Cal. State Bar No. 130631
MANNING & KASS
ELLROD, RAMIREZ, TRESTER LLP
801 South Figueroa Street, 15th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel. (213) 624-6900
jeg@manningllp.com
ROBERT W. COHEN ( pro hac vice )
Cal. State Bar No. 150310
MARIKO TAENAKA ( pro hac vice )
Cal. State Bar No. 273895
LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT W. COHEN, A.P.C.
1875 Century Park East, Suite 1770
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Tel. (310) 282-7586
rwc@robertwcohenlaw.com
mt@robertwcohenlaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA SHIGE TAKIGUCHI, FUMI NONAKA, Case No.: 2:13-cv-01183-HDM-VCF MITSUAKI TAKITA, KAORUKO KOIZUMI, ORDER GRANTING TATSURO SAKAI, SHIZUKO ISHIMORI, YOKO STIPULATION AND PROPOSED HATANO, YUKO NAKAMURA, HIDEHITO ORDER TO AMEND THE CLASS MIURA, YOSHIKO TAZAKI, MASAAKI DEFINITION MORIYA, HATSUNE HATANO, SATORU
MORIYA, HIDENAO TAKAMA, SHIGERU KURISU, SAKA ONO, KAZUHIRO
MATSUMOTO, KAYA HATANAKA, HIROKA YAMAJIRI, KIYOHARU YAMAMOTO, JUNKO
YAMAMOTO, KOICHI INOUE, AKIKO NARUSE, TOSHIMASA NOMURA, and RITSU YURIKUSA,
individually and on behalf of all others similarity situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
MRI INTERNATIONAL, INC., EDWIN J.
FUJINAGA, JUNZO SUZUKI, PAUL MUSASHI SUZUKI, LVT, INC., dba STERLING ESCROW, and DOES 1-500,
Defendants. *2
On March 21, 2016, this Court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. Dkt. No. 404.
The order certified the following MRI investor class:
[A]ll persons who purchased MRI securities during the period July 5, 2008, through May 1, 2013, and were injured as a result of the defendants’ conduct. Excluded from the class are the defendants, their employees, their family members and their affiliates, and the following 26 individuals who are plaintiffs in the pending litigation against the defendants in Japan: (1) Tomoyasu Kojima; (2) Keiko Amaya; (3) Masakazu Sekihara; (4) Chiri Satou; (5) Meiko Murakami; (6) Masayoshi Tsutsumi; (7) Yumiko Ishiguro; (8) Reiko Suzuki; (9) Hiroji Sumita; (10) Eiko Uchiyama; (11) Hideyo Uchiyama; (12) Youzou Shiki; (13) Naoki Nagasawa; (14) Noboru Plaintiffs prepared and filed a proposed Notice of Class Certification using the above class definition. Dkt. No. 410.
However, upon further review of the class definition, the parties now recognize that this class definition inadvertently excludes certain class members (namely those who purchased prior to the class period but nonetheless were injured during the class period) who were included as proposed class members in the Fourth Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 223). Specifically, paragraph 18 of the Fourth Amended Complaint defines the class as follows:
“18. Plaintiffs seek relief on behalf of themselves and a class of all persons, during the Class Period, who were MRI investors and who were injured as a result of defendants’ illegal Ponzi scheme and actions (“Class or Class Members”). Excluded from the Class are the Defendants, their employees, their family members, and affiliates of defendants.” A court can amend or alter the class definition at any time, for any reason, before a decision on the merits. Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(1); Vizcaino v. U.S. Dist. Court for Western Dist. of Washington , 173 F.3d 713, 721 (9th Cir. 1999) (citing Rule 23(c)(1), which gives the court “explicit permission to alter or amend a certification order before [a] decision on the merits . . .”); Andrews Farms v. Ca/cot, Ltd. , 268 27 F.R.D. 380, 384 (E.D. Cal. 2010) (citing Armstrong v. Davis , 275 F.3d 849, 871 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[e]ven 28 after a certification order is entered, the judge remains free to modify”).
*3 The parties therefore seek to have the class definition of the class certification order amended to be consistent with the definition set forth in the operative complaint, and that the court approve the revised Notice of Class Certification.
The parties therefore stipulate as follows:
1. The class definition in the Order Granting Class Certification shall be amended as follows:
The MRI Investor Class consisting of: all persons who were MRI investors and who were injured as a result of the defendants’ alleged illegal Ponzi scheme and actions from July 5, 2008 through July 5, 2013. Excluded from the class are the defendants, their employees, their family members and their affiliates, and the following 26 individuals who are plaintiffs in the pending litigation against the defendants in Japan: (1) Tomoyasu Kojima; (2) Keiko Amaya; (3) Masakazu Sekihara; (4) Chiri Satou; (5) Meiko Murakami; (6) Masayoshi Tsutsumi; (7) Yumiko Ishiguro; (8) Reiko Suzuki; (9) Hiroji Sumita; (10) Eiko Uchiyama; (11) Hideyo Uchiyama; (12) Youzou Shiki; (13) Naoki Nagasawa; (14) Noboru 2. That the Court approve the Notice of Class Certification, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Respectfully submitted.
Dated: May 5, 2016 MANNING & KASS
ELLROD, RAMIREZ, TRESTER LLP By: /s/ James Gibbons JAMES E. GIBBONS STEVEN J. RENICK ZACCARO MORGAN LLP By: /s/ Nicolas Morgan NICOLAS MORGAN Attorneys for Defendants Junzo Suzuki and Paul Suzuki *4 HITZKE & ASSOCIATES By: /s/ Erick Ferran ERICK FERRAN Attorneys for Defendants MRI International, Inc. and Edwin Y. Fujinaga LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT A. GOLDSTEIN By: /s/ Robert Goldstein ROBERT A. GOLDSTEIN Attorneys for Defendant LVT, Inc., dba Sterling Escrow PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. May 6, 2016
DATED: ________________________ _____________________________________
Hon. Howard D. McKibben United States District Judge
