Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin grants the plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate three shareholder derivative actions involving Fiserv, Inc. and designates Martin v. Bisignano as the lead case. The order also establishes deadlines for motions concerning appointment of lead counsel and provides procedures for filings, service, and potential future related actions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the three related shareholder derivative actions should be consolidated because they involve common questions of law or fact.
- Which action should serve as the lead case for the consolidated proceedings.
- What briefing schedule and case-management procedures should govern motions for appointment of lead counsel and future filings.
Holdings
- The related actions should be consolidated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) and Civil Local Rule 42(a) because they involve common questions of law and fact, and consolidation will promote judicial efficiency and reduce the risk of inconsistent rulings.
- Martin v. Bisignano, Case No. 25-cv-1951, is designated as the lead case; the remaining related actions are administratively closed, and filings in the consolidated proceedings must be made in the lead case using the consolidated caption.
- Defendants waive service of the summonses and complaints in the related actions, to the extent service has not been perfected, and waive defenses based on sufficiency of service, while preserving all other defenses; defendants need not respond to the related complaints or substantially similar complaints covered by the order.
Key quotations
“Because the cases involve common questions of law and fact and consolidation will promote judicial efficiency, the motion to consolidate will be granted.”
“Consolidation will, therefore, conserve resources and eliminate the risk of inconsistent rulings.”
Factual background
Three plaintiffs filed shareholder derivative suits against Fiserv, Inc.'s Board of Directors based on substantially similar allegations concerning statements about Fiserv's Clover product and alleged insider trading. Fiserv was named as a nominal defendant. The actions sought nationwide class certification and arose from the same underlying facts and alleged violations of law.
Procedural history
Three shareholder derivative actions were pending in the Eastern District of Wisconsin: Martin v. Bisignano, Silva v. Bisignano, and Peterson v. Lyons. The court granted consolidation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a) and Civil Local Rule 42(a), designated Martin as the lead case, administratively closed the remaining actions, and established deadlines for leadership motions and subsequent scheduling discussions.