Kelly v. Electronic Arts, Inc. et al
Filing
23
ORDER, Motions terminated: 22 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND ENLARGING PAGE LIMITS FOR DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS filed by Patrick Soderlund, Andrew Wilson, Electronic Arts, Inc., Peter Ro bert Moore, Frank D. Gibeau, Blake Jorgensen, Lawrence F Probst, III. Motion Hearing set for 8/29/2014 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Susan Illston.. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 5/14/14. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
ROBERT P. VARIAN (SBN 107459)
Email: rvarian@orrick.com
JAMES N. KRAMER (SBN 154709)
Email: jkramer@orrick.com
ALEXANDER K. TALARIDES (SBN 268068)
Email: atalarides@orrick.com
ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
The Orrick Building
405 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
Telephone:
(415) 773-5700
Facsimile:
(415) 773-5759
7
8
Attorneys for Defendants Electronic Arts, Inc., Andrew Wilson,
Lawrence F. Probst III, Blake J. Jorgensen, Peter Robert Moore,
Frank D. Gibeau, and Patrick Söderlund
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14
15
In re ELECTRONIC ARTS, INC. SECURITIES
LITIGATION
Master File No. 3:13-cv-05837-SI
CLASS ACTION
16
This Document Relates To:
17
18
ALL ACTIONS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ENLARGING PAGE
LIMITS FOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
TO DISMISS
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ENLARGING PAGE LIMITS FOR
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS - (MASTER
FILE NO. 3:13-CV-05837-SI)
1
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2013, Ryan Kelly filed a putative class action complaint,
2
Kelly v. Electronic Arts, Inc., No. 3:13-cv-05837 (the “Kelly Action”), against defendants
3
Electronic Arts, Inc. (“Electronic Arts”), Andrew Wilson, Blake Jorgensen, Patrick Söderlund,
4
Frank D. Gibeau, Lawrence F. Probst III, and Peter Robert Moore (collectively, “Defendants”),
5
alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of purchasers of Electronic
6
Arts common stock between July 24, 2013 and December 4, 2013 (the “Class Period”);
7
WHEREAS, on January 13, 2014, Louis Mastro filed a putative class action complaint,
8
Mastro v. Electronic Arts, Inc., No. 3:14-cv-00188 (the “Mastro Action”), against the same
9
Defendants as the Kelly Action and alleging the same claims on behalf of the same putative class;
10
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2014, the Court entered an order (the “Consolidation Order”)
11
consolidating the Kelly and Mastro Actions under the caption In re Electronic Arts, Inc.
12
Securities Litigation, Master File No. 3:13-cv-05837-SI (the “Consolidated Action”);
13
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2014, the Court entered an order pursuant to the Private
14
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 appointing Ryan Kelly and Louis Mastro (collectively,
15
“Lead Plaintiffs”) to serve as Lead Plaintiffs in this Consolidated Action, and approved Robbins
16
Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP and Pomerantz LLP as Lead Counsel (“Lead Counsel for Lead
17
Plaintiffs and the Class”);
18
19
20
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2014, Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint for
Violations of the Federal Securities Laws (the “Consolidated Complaint”);
WHEREAS, under the Consolidation Order, the deadline for Defendants to file their
21
motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint is May 26, 2014 (the “Motion to Dismiss Filing
22
Deadline”);
23
WHEREAS, Defendants would like to extend the Motion to Dismiss Filing Deadline by
24
two weeks, to June 9, 2014, and Lead Counsel for the Lead Plaintiffs and the Class have
25
stipulated to the requested extension;
26
WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the Parties fully address all issues thoroughly and in a
27
manner beneficial to the Court, the Parties agree that the page limits by the local rules of the
28
Court should be enlarged;
1
STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ENLARGING PAGE LIMITS FOR
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS - (MASTER
FILE NO. 3:13-CV-05837-SI)
1
2
3
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between
undersigned counsel, subject to approval of the Court, that:
1. The briefing schedule on Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint
4
shall be as follows:
5
Defendants’ Opening Brief due:
June 9, 2014
6
Lead Plaintiffs’ Opposition Brief due:
July 24, 2014
7
Defendants’ Reply Brief due:
August 14, 2014
8
9
10
11
12
2.
The page limits for Defendants’ Opening Brief and Lead Plaintiffs’ Opposition
Brief shall be as follows: Defendants’ Opening Brief shall be no longer than twenty-eight (28)
pages; and Lead Plaintiffs’ Opposition Brief shall be no longer than thirty (30) pages.
IT SO STIPULATED.
Dated: May 12, 2014
13
14
ROBERT P. VARIAN
JAMES N. KRAMER
ALEXANDER K. TALARIDES
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
15
/s/ Alexander K. Talarides
Alexander K. Talarides
Attorneys for Defendants
16
17
18
19
20
I, Alexander K. Talarides, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file
this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby
attest that Shawn Williams has concurred in this filing.
21
Dated: May 12, 2014
22
23
SHAWN WILLIAMS
SAMUEL RUDMAN
MARY BLASY
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd
24
25
26
/s/ Shawn Williams
SHAWN WILLIAMS
Co-Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and the Class
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ENLARGING PAGE LIMITS FOR
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS - (MASTER
FILE NO. 3:13-CV-05837-SI)
1
2
3
4
ORDER
Based on the stipulation of the signed parties, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that the Stipulation is approved. Hearing: 8/29/14 at 9 a.m.
It is so ORDERED.
5
6
7
8
5/13/14
DATED: _______________________
THE HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND ENLARGING PAGE LIMITS FOR
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS - (MASTER
FILE NO. 3:13-CV-05837-SI)
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?