Copia Claims v. Calif Infrastructure and Economic Dev. Bank

Filing 54

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 1/5/10 ORDERING lead Pltf's First Amended Complaint 5 DEEMED FILED and shall supersede all prior pleadings in this action; the hearing on dfts' Motion to dismiss consolidated complaint 52 shall be taken off calendar.(Carlos, K)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

KEVIN P. MUCK (CSB No. 120918) CATHERINE KEVANE (CSB No. 215501) FENWICK & WEST LLP 555 California Street, 12th Floor San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

WILLIAM GEORGE, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. CALIFORNIA INFRASTRUCTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BANK, a public instrumentality of the State of California and ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP, an entity, Defendants.

Case No.: 2:09-CV-01610-GEB-DAD STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING FILING OF FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE THERETO

WHEREAS: 1. This case, an alleged class action asserting claims under Section 10(b) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 filed on June 10, 2009 [Docket No. 1], is subject to the requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PSLRA"); 2. On August 4, 2009, the Court signed a stipulation and order [Docket No. 26] pursuant

to which: (a) within forty-five (45) days from the date that the Court appointed a lead plaintiff
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE THERETO

1

CASE NO. 2:09-CV-01610-GEB-DAD

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

plaintiff in this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(3)(B), such lead plaintiff was permitted to file a further amended complaint; and (b) within forty-five (45) days from the filing of such further amended complaint, defendants were to move, answer or otherwise respond to the Operative Complaint; 3. On September 15, 2009, the Court granted the motion of William George ("Lead

Plaintiff") to be appointed lead plaintiff [Docket No. 39], and on October 20, 2009 Lead Plaintiff filed a Consolidated Complaint for Violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and of Rule 10b-5 Promulgated Thereunder ("Consolidated Complaint") against Defendants California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank ("I-Bank") and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP ("Orrick") (collectively "Defendants") [Docket No. 40]; 4. On December 4, 2009, Defendants jointly filed a motion to dismiss the Consolidated

Complaint [Docket No. 47], and pursuant to agreement of the parties that motion was set for hearing on February 8, 2010; 5. Rather than oppose Defendants' motion to dismiss, Lead Plaintiff has prepared and

submitted to the Court on December 28, 2009 a First Amended Consolidated Complaint for Violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and of Rule 10b-5(a), (b) and (c) Promulgated Thereunder ("First Amended Consolidated Complaint") [Docket No. 52]; and 6. Defendants do not oppose the filing of the First Amended Consolidated Complaint,

provided that they have sufficient time to move to dismiss or otherwise respond to that new pleading, and the parties have agreed to confer on a mutually convenient briefing and hearing schedule for Defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss the First Amended Consolidated Complaint. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and among the undersigned counsel for the parties, that: 1. Lead Plaintiff should be permitted to file his First Amended Consolidated Complaint,

which shall supersede all prior pleadings in this action; 2. Defendants' motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint, previously set for hearing

on February 8, 2010, shall be taken off calendar; and

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE THERETO

-2-

CASE NO. 2:09-CV-01610-GEB-DAD

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.

Defendants will move or otherwise respond to the First Amended Consolidated

Complaint on or before February 5, 2010.

DATED: January 5, 2010

MCGRANE GREENFIELD LLP By: /s/ Christopher D. Sullivan Christopher D. Sullivan Attorneys for Plaintiff

DATED: January 5, 2010

FENWICK & WEST LLP By: /s/ Kevin P. Muck Kevin P. Muck Attorneys for Defendant ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP

DATED: January 5, 2010

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA By: /s/ Jeffrey A. Rich Jeffrey A. Rich Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant CALIFORNIA INFRASTRUCTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BANK

I certify that a true copy of the foregoing was served electronically via the CM/ECF system on all counsel of record on this 5 day of January, 2010.

/s/ Kevin P. Muck____________

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE THERETO

-3-

CASE NO. 2:09-CV-01610-GEB-DAD

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE THERETO

ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Lead Plaintiff's First Amended Consolidated Complaint, submitted to the Court on

December 28, 2009 [Docket No. 52], is hereby deemed filed and shall supersede all prior pleadings in this action; 2. Defendants' motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint, filed on December 4,

2009 and previously set for hearing on February 8, 2010, shall be taken off calendar; and 3. Defendants will move or otherwise respond to the First Amended Consolidated

Complaint on or before February 5, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 5, 2010 GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge

-4-

CASE NO. 2:09-CV-01610-GEB-DAD