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) 522-2087Northern 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