Neal v. Polycom, Inc. et al

Filing 82

Stipulation and Scheduling Order re [Dkt. #80]. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 5/5/15. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

KEITH E. EGGLETON, State Bar No. 159842
Email: [e-mail]
RODNEY G. STRICKLAND, State Bar No. 161934
Email: [e-mail]
LUKE A. LISS, State Bar No. 247520
Email: [e-mail]
PHILIP K. RUCKER, State Bar No. 281318
Email: [e-mail]
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation
650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
Polycom, Inc., Michael R. Kourey,
and Eric F. Brown

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

MARK NATHANSON, Individually and On
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
POLYCOM, INC., ANDREW M. MILLER,
)
MICHAEL R. KOUREY, and ERIC F. BROWN, )
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER
CASE NO. 3:13-CV-03476-SC

CASE NO.: 3:13-cv-03476-SC
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER

1

Pursuant to N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rules 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, the parties respectfully submit

2

the following Stipulation and [Proposed] Scheduling Order regarding a briefing schedule for

3

defendants Polycom, Inc., Michael R. Kourey, Eric F. Brown, and Andrew M. Miller’s

4

(collectively, “Defendants”) response(s) to the Second Amended Complaint for Violations of the

5

Federal Securities Laws (ECF No. 79) (the “Second Amended Complaint”).

6

WHEREAS, on February 24, 2014, Mark Nathanson (“Lead Plaintiff”) filed the First

7

Amended Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws (the “First Amended

8

Complaint”) (ECF No. 47);

9
10
11

WHEREAS, Defendants moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint on April 25,
2014 (ECF Nos. 51, 53);
WHEREAS, on April 3, 2015, the Court granted in part, and denied in part, Defendants’

12

motions to dismiss (ECF No. 72), providing Lead Plaintiff thirty days leave, until May 4, 2015,

13

to amend his complaint;

14

WHEREAS, on May 4, 2015, Lead Plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint;

15

WHEREAS, Defendants will move to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint;

16

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed, subject to the Court’s approval, upon a briefing

17
18

schedule for Defendants’ motion(s) to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint.
NOW, THEREFORE, subject to the Court’s approval, the parties hereby stipulate and

19

agree as follows:

20

(1)

21
22
23
24
25
26

Defendants shall file their motion(s) to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint by

no later than June 18, 2015;
(2)

Lead Plaintiff shall file his opposition brief(s) to Defendants’ motion(s) to dismiss

by no later than August 3, 2015;
(3)

Defendants shall file their reply brief(s) in support of their motion(s) to dismiss by

no later than August 31, 2015.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.

27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER
CASE NO. 3:13-CV-03476-SC

-1-

1

Dated: May 5, 2015

2

Respectfully submitted,
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation

3
4

By:

5
6

Attorneys for Defendants
Polycom, Inc., Eric Brown, and Michael
Kourey

7
8

/s/ Keith E. Eggleton
Keith E. Eggleton
[e-mail]

Dated: May 5, 2015

By:

9
10

/s/ Philip T. Besirof
Philip T. Besirof
[e-mail]

13

MORRISON FOERSTER
PAUL T. FRIEDMAN
PHILIP T. BESIROF
425 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

14

Attorneys for Defendant Andrew M. Miller

11
12

15

Dated: May 5, 2015

By:

16
17

POMERANTZ LLP
JEREMY A. LIEBERMAN
EMMA GILMORE
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

18
19
20
21

POMERANTZ LLP
PATRICK V. DAHLSTROM
10 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

22
23
24

Attorneys for Lead Plaintiff Mark Nathanson

25
26
27

/s/ Emma Gilmore
Emma Gilmore
[e-mail]

I, Keith E. Eggleton, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this
Stipulation and [Proposed] Scheduling Order. In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1, I hereby
attest that Philip T. Besirof and Emma Gilmore have concurred in this filing.

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER
CASE NO.: 3:13-cv-03476-SC

-2-

1
2
3

DECLARATION OF KEITH E. EGGLETON
I, Keith E. Eggleton, declare:
1.

I am a member of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., counsel for defendants

4

Polycom, Inc., Michael R. Kourey, and Eric F. Brown. I make this declaration in support of the

5

parties’ Stipulation and [Proposed] Scheduling Order. The parties seek to adjust the default time

6

frames set forth in the Local Rules and the Federal Rules with regard to responding to Lead

7

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint to an appropriate schedule.

8

2.

This is the parties’ eighth request for a modification of time, and first with respect

9

to the Second Amended Complaint. The parties previously filed stipulations to extend the time to

10

respond to (previously operative) complaints on September 23, 2013 (ECF No. 17), and December

11

30, 2013 (ECF No. 45). Both of these stipulations were approved by the Court (see ECF Nos. 18,

12

46). Additionally, the parties have filed six stipulated requests to continue the Initial Case

13

Management Conference; these were filed on September 23, 2013 (ECF No. 17), December 9,

14

2013 (ECF No. 36), April 4, 2014 (ECF No. 49), November 21, 2014 (ECF No. 64), January 2,

15

2015 (ECF No. 66), and February 6, 2015 (ECF No. 69). The Court granted these six previous

16

requests (see ECF Nos. 18, 39, 50, 65, 67, 68, 70).

17

3.

18

the Court.

19
20

The proposed briefing schedule will not impact any other deadlines or dates set by

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May
5, 2015 in Palo Alto, California.
By: /s/ Keith E. Eggleton
Keith E. Eggleton

21
22
23
24

[PROPOSED] ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27

Dated: 5/5/15

THE HONORABLE SAMUEL CONTI
United States District Judge

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER
CASE NO.: 3:13-cv-03476-SC

-3-