Laffen v. Hewlett-Packard Company, Plan Committee Investment Review Committee et al

Filing 123

ORDER granting 122 STIPULATION Re Briefing Schedule filed by Shoreline Investment Management Company, Hewlett-Packard Company 401(K) Plan, Hewlet-Packard Company. Reset Deadlines: Motions to dismiss or otherwise response due by 9/12/2014. Responses to motion due by 11/6/2014. Replies to motion due by 12/19/2014. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 8/1/2014. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ
MARC WOLINSKY (pro hac vice)
GEORGE T. CONWAY III (pro hac vice)
VINCENT G. LEVY (pro hac vice)
51 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019
Tel./Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

6
7
8
9
10

FARELLA, BRAUN & MARTEL, LLP
NEIL A. GOTEINER, State Bar No. 83524
THOMAS B. MAYHEW, State Bar No. 183539
235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Tel./Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant Hewlett-Packard Company

11
12
13
14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16
17

IN RE HP ERISA LITIGATION

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
BRIEFING SCHEDULE

18
19
20

Master File No. 12-CV-06199 CRB

This Document Relates to: All Actions

Dept. Courtroom 6, 17th Floor
Judge: Honorable Charles R. Breyer

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
MASTER FILE NO. 12-CV-6199 CRB

1

WHEREAS, on June 3, 2013, plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Amended Class Action

2

Complaint For Violations Of The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the “Amended Com-

3

plaint”) (Docket 50);

4

WHEREAS, on April 2, 2014, the Court granted the following motions: defendants Hewlett-

5

Packard Company 401(K) Plan, Hewlett-Packard Company, David W. Healy, Catherine A. Lesjak,

6

Marc A. Levine, John N. McMullen, James T. Murrin, John F. Schultz and Shoreline Investment

7

Management Company’s joint motion to dismiss (Docket 81); and defendant Michael J. Holston’s

8

individual motion to dismiss (Docket 78) without prejudice and granted plaintiffs leave to amend

9
10
11
12

(Docket 116);
WHEREAS, on July 16, 2014, plaintiffs filed their Second Consolidated Amended Class
Action Complaint For Violations Of The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the “Second
Amended Complaint”) (Docket 121);
WHEREAS, by stipulation and order dated April 16, 2014, the Court set a schedule for

13
briefing defandants’ anticipated motions to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (Docket 118),
14
15
16
17
18

according to which defendants’ motion would be due on September 2, 2014; plaintiffs’ brief in opposition would be due on October 17, 2014, and defendants’ reply briefs would be due on November 17, 2014;
WHEREAS, counsel for the plaintiffs and for defendants desire to amend the briefing
schedule on the anticipated motions to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint;

19

NOW, THEREFORE, subject to the Court’s approval, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND

20

AGREED, by and among the undersigned parties, through their undersigned counsel of record, as

21

follows:

22
23
24
25

1.

Defendants shall move to dismiss or otherwise respond to the Second Amended

Complaint on or before September 12, 2014.
2.

Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss, assuming such

motions are filed, on or before November 6, 2014.

26
27
28

STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
MASTER FILE NO. 12-CV-6199 CRB

1
2
3
4

3.

Defendants shall file their replies in support of any motions to dismiss on or before

December 19, 2014.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: July 31, 2014

WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ

5
By: ______

_____________
Marc Wolinsky

6
7

Attorneys for Defendants Hewlett-Packard Company,
Shoreline Investment Management Company, and
Hewlett-Packard Company 401(k) Plan

8
9
10

DATED: July 31, 2014

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, PC

11
By: __/s/ Steven M. Schatz
Steven M. Schatz

12
13

Attorneys for Defendant Catherine A. Lesjak

14
15

DATED: July 31, 2014

FENWICK & WEST LLP

16
By: __/s/ Kevin Muck
Kevin Muck

17

___________

18
Attorneys for Defendants Marc Levine, John McMullen
and James Murrin

19
20
DATED: July 31, 2014

ZAMANSKY LLC

21
22
23
24

By: __/s/ Samuel Bonderoff__________
Samuel Bonderoff
Interim Lead Class Counsel for Plaintiffs

25
26
27
28

STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
MASTER FILE NO. 12-CV-6199 CRB

ORDER

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S

10

ER

H

9

RT

8

R NIA

______
Honorable Charles R. Breyer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
er
R. Brey
Charles
Judge

NO

7

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

FO

6

Date: August 1, 2014

LI

5

RT
U
O

4

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

A

3

Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing,

UNIT
ED

2

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
MASTER FILE NO. 12-CV-6199 CRB