Bruce v. Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd et al

Filing 102

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT ZHENGRONG SHI'S TIME TO RESPOND TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, SET A BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE THE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND RESET RELATED DEADLINES. Initial Case Management Conference set for 8/28/2014 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/7/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/7/2014)

1 Stephen D. Hibbard (SBN 177865)
SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP
2 Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 3800
San Francisco, CA 94111
3 Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
4 Email: [e-mail]
5 Attorneys for Defendant Zhengrong Shi
6 [Additional counsel listed on signature page]
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

8
9

SCOTT BRUCE, Individually and on Behalf of
10 All Others Similarly Situated,
11
12

Plaintiff,
v.

13 SUNTECH POWER HOLDINGS CO., LTD.
and ZHENGRONG SHI,
14
Defendants.
15

Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT
ZHENGRONG SHI’S TIME TO
RESPOND TO THE SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT, SET A
BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER
CONTINUE THE INITIAL CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
RESET RELATED DEADLINES
Judge:

Hon. Richard Seeborg

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT SHI’S TIME TO RESPOND TO SAC,
SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS

1

WHEREAS, on December 26, 2013, the Court issued an Order dismissing the

2 Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint and granting lead plaintiffs James Bachesta,
3 Thanh Le, and Chen Weifeng (the “Lead Plaintiffs”) leave to file an amended complaint within
4 thirty (30) days (Dkt. No. 98);
5

WHEREAS, on January 27, 2014, Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Second Amended

6 Class Action Complaint (Dkt. No. 99) (the “SAC”) against Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. and
7 Zhengrong Shi (“Shi”);
8

WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 6(d) and 15(a)(3), Shi must

9 answer, move to dismiss or otherwise respond to the SAC on or before February 13, 2014;
10

WHEREAS the Lead Plaintiffs and Shi (collectively, the “Parties”), through their

11 respective counsel, have agreed to extend Shi’s time to answer, move to dismiss or otherwise
12 respond to the SAC and have further agreed on a schedule for briefing any such motion to dismiss;
13

WHEREAS, on November 22, 2013, the Court issued an Order continuing the Initial Case

14 Management Conference in the above-captioned action to March 20, 2014 (Dkt. No. 96);
15

WHEREAS the Parties believe that, in order to avoid the needless waste of the Court’s and

16 the Parties’ resources, it would be prudent to defer the Initial Case Management Conference and
17 the completion of initial disclosures until after Shi has had the opportunity to file any motion to
18 dismiss and the Court has ruled on any such motion to dismiss; and
19

WHEREAS the Parties further believe that postponement of initial disclosures and any

20 discussions about discovery at this time is proper because the Private Securities Litigation Reform
21 Act of 1995 (the “PSLRA”) generally stays all discovery and other proceedings, including initial
22 disclosures, pending the disposition of motions to dismiss in securities actions such as this one.
23 See Medhekar v. United States Dist. Court, 99 F.3d 325, 328-29 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding F.R.C.P.
24 26(a)’s initial disclosure requirements are disclosures or other proceedings for purposes of
25 PSLRA’s stay provision, and must be stayed pending disposition of motion to dismiss).
26

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the Parties, through their

27 undersigned counsel, subject to Court approval, as follows:
28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT SHI’S TIME TO RESPOND TO SAC,
SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS
1

1

1.

Defendant Shi’s time to answer, move to dismiss or otherwise respond to the SAC

2 shall be extended through and including March 28, 2014.
3

2.

The Lead Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to any motion to dismiss by Shi on or

4 before May 27, 2014.
5

3.

Shi shall file any reply in further support of his motion to dismiss on or before

6 June 26, 2014.
7

4.

The Initial Case Management Conference is continued until August 28, 2014, or

8 such other date as may be ordered by the Court.
9

5.

This Stipulation is entered into without prejudice to any party seeking any interim

6.

Nothing in this Stipulation shall be construed as a waiver of any of Shi’s rights or

10 relief.
11

12 positions in law or equity, or as a waiver of any defenses that he would otherwise have.
13

7.

There have been no prior extensions of Shi’s time to answer, move or otherwise

14 respond to the SAC.
15

8.

The Initial Case Management Conference and related deadlines have been

16 continued four times previously.
17

9.

The Parties do not seek to reset these dates for the purpose of delay, and the

18 proposed new dates will not have an effect on any pre-trial and trial dates because the Court has
19 yet to schedule these dates.
20
21 Dated: February 7, 2014

SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP

22

By: /s/ Jerome S. Fortinsky

23

Jerome S. Fortinsky (admitted pro hac vice)
H. Miriam Farber (admitted pro hac vice)
599 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

24
25
26
27

28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT SHI’S TIME TO RESPOND TO SAC,
SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS
2

1

4

SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP
Stephen D. Hibbard
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 3800
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

5

Attorneys for Defendant Zhengrong Shi

2
3

6
Dated: February 7, 2013

COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC

7
By: /s/ Daniel S. Sommers
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Steven J. Toll
Daniel S. Sommers (admitted pro hac vice)
Joshua M. Kolsky
Elizabeth Aniskevich
1100 New York Avenue, N.W.
West Tower, Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
POMERANTZ GROSSMAN HUFFORD
DAHLSTROM & GROSS LLP
Patrick V. Dahlstrom (admitted pro hac vice)
Joshua B. Silverman (admitted pro hac vice)
Louis C. Ludwig (admitted pro hac vice)
10 South LaSalle St., Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Co-Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs James Bachesta,
Thanh Le and Chen Weifeng

20
21
22
23
24
25
26

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP
Michael M. Goldberg
Lionel Z. Glancy
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Liaison Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs James Bachesta,
Thanh Le and Chen Weifeng

27
28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT SHI’S TIME TO RESPOND TO SAC,
SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS
3

1
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
3 DATED:

7
February __, 2014

4
5

______________________________
Hon. Richard Seeborg
United States District Judge

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 TO EXTEND DEFENDANT SHI’S TIME TO RESPOND TO SAC,
SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS
4

1
2

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3)
I, Jerome S. Fortinsky, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this

3 Stipulation. In compliance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Daniel S. Sommers of
4 Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC has concurred in this filing.
5 DATED: February 7, 2013
6

By: /s/ Jerome S. Fortinsky
Jerome S. Fortinsky

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 TO EXTEND DEFENDANT SHI’S TIME TO RESPOND TO SAC,
SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND FURTHER CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Case No. 3:12-cv-04061-RS
5