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

Filing 61

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANT SUNTECH POWER HOLDINGS CO., LTD.'S TIME TO RESPOND TO LEAD PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ALTERNATIVE SERVICE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/26/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/26/2013)

1 Stephen D. Hibbard (SBN 117865)
[e-mail]
2 SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 3800
3 San Francisco, CA 94111-5994
Telephone: [phone]
4 Facsimile: [phone]
5

Counsel for Defendant
6 Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd.
7 [Additional counsel listed on signature page]
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

10 SCOTT BRUCE, Individually and on Behalf of
All Others Similarly Situated,
11
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
SUNTECH POWER HOLDINGS CO., LTD.,
14 ZHENGRONG SHI, DAVID KING, and AMY
YI ZHANG,
15
Defendants.
16

Case No. 3:12-cv-4061-RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANT
SUNTECH POWER HOLDINGS CO.,
LTD.’S TIME TO RESPOND TO LEAD
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
ALTERNATIVE SERVICE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. & [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING
DEF.’S TIME TO RESPOND TO MOT. FOR ALT. SERVICE

Case No. 3:12-cv-4061-RS

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, Lead Plaintiffs James Bachesta, Thanh Le, and

2 Chen Weifeng (collectively, the “Lead Plaintiffs”) and defendant Suntech Power Holdings Co.,
3 Ltd. (“Suntech,” together with Plaintiffs, the “Parties”), by and through their counsel, hereby agree
4 and stipulate that good cause exists to request an order from the Court extending Suntech’s time to
5 respond to Lead Plaintiffs’ Motion to Authorize Alternative Service of Two Individual Defendants
6 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3) (the “Service Motion”) currently set for
7 hearing on April 25, 2013 and adjust accordingly the deadline for Lead Plaintiffs’ reply, if any.
8

WHEREAS on December 17, 2012, the Court entered an Order setting the time for

9 Suntech to answer, move or otherwise respond to the Consolidated Amended Complaint on or
10 before April 8, 2013;
11

WHEREAS on March 15, 2013, Lead Plaintiffs filed the Service Motion;

12

WHEREAS Suntech is currently scheduled to respond to the Service Motion on or

13 before March 29, 2013; and
14

WHEREAS Suntech through its counsel sought the agreement of Lead Plaintiffs to

15 the aforementioned extension of time for Suntech to respond to the Service Motion and Lead
16 Plaintiffs through their counsel have agreed upon the dates for Suntech to respond to the Service
17 Motion and Lead Plaintiffs to reply in further support thereof provided that the modification of the
18 briefing schedule does not cause a change in the currently scheduled hearing date of April 25,
19 2013;
20

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

21

1.

Suntech shall file a response to Lead Plaintiffs’ Service Motion on or before

22 April 12, 2013.
23

2.

Lead Plaintiffs shall file any reply in support of their Service Motion on or

24 before April 19, 2013.
25

3.

A hearing on the Service Motion shall be heard on April 25, 2013, in

26 accordance with the Clerk’s Notice Resetting Time on the Motion Hearing.
27

4.

By this stipulation, Lead Plaintiffs do not waive any arguments in response

28 to Suntech’s forthcoming response to Lead Plaintiffs’ Service Motion, including arguments
STIP. & [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 1
Case No. 3:12-cv-4061-RS
DEF.’S TIME TO RESPOND TO MOT. FOR ALT. SERVICE

1 regarding whether Suntech has standing to oppose Lead Plaintiffs’ Service Motion.
2

WHEREFORE, the Parties respectfully request that this Court issue an order

3 granting the Parties’ request to set the time for Suntech to respond to Lead Plaintiffs’ Service
4 Motion and Lead Plaintiffs’ reply in further support thereof as set forth in the following
5 [Proposed] Order.
6
7

IT IS SO STIPULATED THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

8
9 DATED: March 26, 2013

SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP

10
By:

11
12

/s/ Jerome S. Fortinsky

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]

13
14
15
16

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

17
18
19
20

Counsel for Defendant Suntech Power
Holdings Co., Ltd.

21
22
23

DATED: March 26, 2013

24

COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL
PLLC

25

By:

/s/ Daniel S. Sommers

26
27
28
STIP. & [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 2
DEF.’S TIME TO RESPOND TO MOT. FOR ALT. SERVICE

Case No. 3:12-cv-4061-RS

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]

1
2
3
4
5

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]

6
7
8
9
10
11

Co-Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs James
Bachesta, Thanh Le and Chen Weifeng

12
13

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP

14

Michael M. Goldberg
Lionel Z. Glancy
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

15
16
17
18

Liaison Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs James
Bachesta, Thanh Le and Chen Weifeng

19
20
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
21
DATED: 3/26/13
22
23
24

_____________________________
Hon. Richard Seeborg
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28
STIP. & [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 3
DEF.’S TIME TO RESPOND TO MOT. FOR ALT. SERVICE

Case No. 3:12-cv-4061-RS