Neal v. Polycom, Inc. et al

Filing 94

STIPULATION AND ORDER Enlarging Time for Defendants' Reply Briefs. Set/Reset Deadlines as to 85 and 86] MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. Replies due by 10/9/2015. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 10/02/2015. (tmiS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/2/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 PAUL T. FRIEDMAN (CA SBN 98381) PFriedman@mofo.com PHILIP T. BESIROF (CA SBN 185053) PBesirof@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Attorneys for Defendant ANDREW M. MILLER 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 MARK NATHANSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 13 CLASS ACTION 14 15 16 17 18 Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC Plaintiff, v. POLYCOM, INC., ANDREW M. MILLER, MICHAEL R. KOUREY, and ERIC F. BROWN, Defendants. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ENLARGING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS’ REPLY BRIEFS 1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, plaintiff Mark Nathanson 2 (“Lead Plaintiff”) and defendants Polycom, Inc., Michael R. Kourey, Eric F. Brown, and 3 Andrew M. Miller (“Defendants”) respectfully request that the Court adopt the parties’ stipulation 4 below as the order of the Court, which extends the time for Defendants to file their reply briefs 5 from October 2 to October 9, 2015. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 FACTUAL BACKGROUND TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION In support of this stipulation, the undersigned parties provide the following facts, which are verified in the supporting Declaration of Philip T. Besirof: 1. On February 24, 2014, Lead Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws (the “First Amended Complaint”) (ECF No. 47); 2. On April 25, 2014, Defendants moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (ECF Nos. 51, 53); 3. On April 3, 2015, the Court granted in part, and denied in part, Defendants’ 14 motions to dismiss (ECF No. 72), providing Lead Plaintiff until May 4, 2015, to amend his 15 complaint; 16 17 18 4. On May 4, 2015, Lead Plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 79); 5. On June 18, 2015, the Court entered a scheduling order pursuant to which 19 Defendants’ motions to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint were due on June 26, 2015; 20 Lead Plaintiff’s opposition brief was due on August 28, 2015; and Defendants’ reply briefs are 21 due on October 2, 2015 (ECF No. 84) (“Scheduling Order”); 22 6. On June 26, 2015, Defendants filed their motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 85, 86); 23 7. On August 28, 2015, Plaintiff filed opposition (ECF No. 92); 24 8. Due to unexpected scheduling conflicts for Mr. Miller’s counsel, the parties have 25 agreed to extend the due date for Defendants’ reply briefs by one week to Friday, 26 October 9, 2015; and 27 28 9. Other than the briefing schedule for Defendants’ reply briefs, the proposed extension will not impact any other deadlines or dates set by the Court, including the hearing date STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC 1 1 set for October 23, 2015. 2 3 STIPULATION In light of these facts, the undersigned parties jointly request that the Court modify the 4 briefing schedule for Defendants’ motions to dismiss currently set forth in the Scheduling Order 5 as follows: Defendants shall file their reply brief(s) in support of their motions to dismiss no later 6 than October 9, 2015. 7 8 IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: October 1, 2015 9 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: 10 /s/ Philip T. Besirof Philip T. Besirof 14 Paul T. Friedman Philip T. Besirof 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Email: PFriedman@mofo.com Email: PBesirof@mofo.com 15 Attorneys for Defendant Andrew Miller 11 12 13 16 17 18 Dated: October 1, 2015 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation By: 19 /s/ Keith E. Eggleton Keith E. Eggleton Keith E. Eggleton Rodney G. Strickland Luke A. Liss Philip K. Rucker 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: (650) 493-9300 Facsimile: (650) 493-6811 Email: keggleton@wsgr.com Email: rstrickland@wsgr.com Email: lliss@wsgr.com Email: prucker@wsgr.com 20 21 22 23 24 25 Attorneys for Defendants Polycom, Inc., Michael R. Kourey, and Eric F. Brown 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC 2 1 Dated: October 1, 2015 2 POMERANTZ LLP By: 3 /s/ Jeremy A. Lieberman Jeremy A. Lieberman JEREMY A. LIEBERMAN EMMA GILMORE 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, New York 10016 Telephone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (212) 661-8665 Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com Email: egilmore@pomlaw.com 4 5 6 7 8 PATRICK V. DAHLSTROM 10 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com 9 10 11 Attorneys for Lead Plaintiff Mark Nathanson 12 13 ECF ATTESTATION 14 15 16 17 I, Philip Besirof, am the ECF User whose ID and Password are being used to file this motion. In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Rodney G. Strickland and Jeremy A. Lieberman have concurred in this filing. 18 19 20 Dated: October 1, 2015 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: 21 /s/ Philip T. Besirof Philip T. Besirof Paul T. Friedman Philip T. Besirof 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Email: PFriedman@mofo.com Email: PBesirof@mofo.com 22 23 24 25 26 Attorneys for Defendant Andrew Miller 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC 3 1 DECLARATION OF PHILIP T. BESIROF 2 I, PHILIP T. BESIROF, hereby declare as follows: 3 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and am admitted 4 to practice before this Court. I am a member of the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP, and 5 counsel of record for defendant Andrew Miller. I submit this Declaration in support of the 6 parties’ Stipulation and [Proposed] Scheduling Order (hereafter, the “Stipulation”). If called as a 7 witness, I would testify to the facts listed below. 8 9 10 2. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, I attest that the facts set forth in the Stipulation, paragraphs 1 through 8 inclusive, are all true and accurate. 3. This is the parties’ tenth request for a modification of time and the third with 11 respect to the Second Amended Complaint. The parties previously filed stipulations to extend the 12 time to respond to previously operative complaints on September 23, 2013 (ECF No. 17) and 13 December 30, 2013 (ECF No. 45). These stipulations were approved by the Court (see ECF Nos. 14 18, 46). Additionally, the parties filed six stipulated requests to continue the Initial Case 15 Management Conference; these were filed on September 23, 2013 (ECF No. 17), December 9, 16 2013 (ECF No. 36), April 4, 2014 (ECF No. 49), November 21, 2014 (ECF No. 64), January 2, 17 2015 (ECF No. 66), and February 6, 2015 (ECF No. 69). The Court granted these six previous 18 requests (see ECF Nos. 18, 39, 50, 65, 67, 68, 70). Finally, the parties filed two stipulations to 19 extend the time to respond to the Second Amended Complaint on May 5, 2015 and June 17, 2015 20 (ECF Nos. 80, 83), which were granted on May 5, 2015 and June 18, 2015, respectively 21 (ECF Nos. 82, 84). 22 4. Other than the reply briefing scheduling for the motions to dismiss the Second 23 Amended Complaint, the proposed schedule will not impact any other deadlines or dates set by 24 the Court. 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC 4 1 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the 2 foregoing is true and correct and that this Declaration was executed in San Francisco, California, 3 on this 1st day of October, 2015. 4 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 5 By: 6 /s/ Philip T. Besirof Philip T. Besirof 7 8 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 S 10/02/2015 Dated: __________________________ UNIT ED am Judge S RT 16 ti uel Con NO 15 17 H ER 18 R NIA THE HONORABLE SAMUEL CONTI United States District Judge 14 FO 13 RT U O 12 S DISTRICT TE C TA LI 10 [PROPOSED] ORDER A 9 N F D IS T IC T O R C 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Case No. 3:13-cv-03476-SC 5

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?