Westley et al v. Oclaro, Inc. et al

Filing 95

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 94 ON CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT filed by Alain Couder, Jerry Turin, James Haynes, Oclaro, Inc.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 11/28/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2012)

1
2
3
4

GIDON M. CAINE (Cal. State Bar No. 188110)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
275 Middlefield Road
Suite 150
Menlo Park, California 94025-4008
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

JESSICA P. CORLEY (admitted pro hac vice)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
One Atlantic Center
1201 West Peachtree Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
OCLARO, INC., ALAIN COUDER,
JERRY TURIN, and JAMES HAYNES

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14
15

CURTIS and CHARLOTTE WESTLEY,
individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated,

Case No. C11-2448 EMC
and related consolidated action

16
Plaintiffs,

17
v.

18
OCLARO, INC., et al.,

19
Defendants.

20
21
22

IN RE OCLARO, INC. DERIVATIVE
LITIGATION,

23

This Document Relates to:

24

No. C11-2448 EMC

Lead Case No. C11-3176 EMC
(Derivative Action)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER ON CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE STATEMENT

25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT

1

WHEREAS, on May 19, 2011, plaintiffs Curtis and Charlotte Westley filed a Class Action

2

Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws (“Complaint”) (Dkt. No. 1) against

3

defendants Oclaro, Inc., Alain Couder, Jerry Turin, and James Haynes in the above-entitled matter;

4

WHEREAS, on October 27, 2011, Lead Plaintiff Connecticut Laborers’ Pension Fund

5

(“Lead Plaintiff”) filed an Amended Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws

6

(“Amended Complaint”) (Dkt. No. 39) against Defendants Oclaro, Inc., Alain Couder, and Jerry

7

Turin (collectively, “Defendants”);

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

WHEREAS, on December 12, 2011, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended
Complaint (Dkt. No. 44);
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants’ motion to
dismiss the Amended Complaint and Lead Plaintiff leave to amend (Dkt. No. 58);
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2012, Lead Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint for
Violation of the Federal Securities Laws (“Second Amended Complaint”) (Dkt. No. 62);
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2012, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint (Dkt. No. 63);

16

WHEREAS, on September 21, 2012, the Court issued an Order granting Defendants’ motion

17

to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint and Lead Plaintiff leave to amend (“September 21

18

Order”) (Dkt. No. 79);

19
20

WHEREAS, on October 4, 2012, Lead Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File Motion for
Reconsideration of the September 21 Order (“Motion for Leave”) (Dkt. No. 82);

21

WHEREAS, on October 29, 2012, the Court issued notice rescheduling the Case

22

Management Conference for December 11, 2012 and the filing of the parties’ Joint Case

23

Management Statement for December 4, 2012 (Dkt. No. 90);

24
25
26
27
28

WHEREAS, on October 30, 2012, Defendants filed an Opposition to Lead Plaintiff’s Motion
for Leave (Dkt. No. 91);
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2012, Lead Plaintiff filed a Reply in Support of the Motion
for Leave (Dkt. No. 93);
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2012, the Court will hold a hearing on Lead Plaintiff’s Motion
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT

1

for Leave;

2

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C.

3

§ 78u-4(b)(3)(B), discovery is currently stayed during the pendency of Defendants’ motion to

4

dismiss;

5

WHEREAS, based on the discovery stay and in order to avoid the unnecessary expenditure

6

of the Court’s resources or effort by the parties to this action, the parties have agreed, subject to the

7

Court’s approval, that there is no need at this time for the parties to file the Joint Case Management

8

Conference Statement; and

9
10

WHEREAS, this Stipulation and Order is without prejudice to, or waiver of, any rights,
arguments, or defenses otherwise available to the parties to this action.

11
12

NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned parties, by and through their counsel of record,
stipulate as follows:

13

1.

14

The parties do not need to file a Case Management Conference Statement on
December 4, 2012.

15

DATED: November 27, 2012

16

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN &
DOWD LLP

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

By: _/s/ Julie A. Kearns
_
JULIE A. KEARNS (Cal. State Bar No.
246949)
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, California 92101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

By: _/s/ Gidon M. Caine
_
GIDON M. CAINE (Cal. State Bar No. 188110)
275 Middlefield Road
Suite 150
Menlo Park, California 94025-4008
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

and

and

SHAWN A. WILLIAMS (Cal. State Bar
No. 213113)
Post Montgomery Center
One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile [phone]
[e-mail]

JESSICA P. CORLEY (pro hac vice)
One Atlantic Center
1201 West Peachtree Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Counsel for Defendants Oclaro, Inc., Alain Couder,
Jerry Turin

Counsel for Plaintiffs
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT

1

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

2

I am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to file the foregoing

3

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order on Case Management Conference Statement. Pursuant to General

4

Order No. 45, Section X (B) regarding signatures, I, Gidon M. Caine, attest that concurrence in the

5

filing of this document has been obtained.

6

DATED: NOVEMBER 27, 2012

7

/S/ GIDON M. CAINE
GIDON M. CAINE (CAL. STATE BAR NO. 188110)

8

S

13
dwa
Judge E

16

A

H

ER

LI

RT

15

hen

rd M. C

NO

14

R NIA

12

__________________________________________
HON. EDWARD M. CHEN ERED
O ORD
United States District Court Judge
IT IS S

FO

11

November 28, 2012
DATED: ____________________

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

10

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNIT
ED

9

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT