Hayes v. Magnachip Semiconductor Corp. et al

Filing 18

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 17 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS' TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF filed by Magnachip Semiconductor Corp. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 23, 2014. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/23/2014)

1
2
3
4

JOHN C. TANG, State Bar No. 212371
[e-mail]
JONES DAY
555 California Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND,
WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
Daniel J. Kramer
[e-mail]
Robert N. Kravitz
[e-mail]
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
– and –
Alex Young K Oh
[e-mail]
2001 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1047
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.

18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

20
21
22

RICHARD HAYES, Individually and on Behalf of
All Other Persons Similarly Situated,

23

Plaintiff,

24

v.

25

MAGNACHIP SEMICONDUCTOR CORP., SANG
PARK, TAE YOUNG HWANG, and MARGARET
SAKAI,

26
27
28

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-01160-JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS'
TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS
ACTION COMPLAINT AND
CONTINUING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
HEARING ON MOTION TO
APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF

Defendants.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF
Doc#: US1:9411006v1

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

1

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Richard Hayes (“Plaintiff”) filed a purported Class Action

2

Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws (the “Complaint”) against Defendants

3

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp. (“MagnaChip”), Sang Park, Tae Young Hwang, and Margaret

4

Sakai (collectively, “Defendants”) in the above-captioned matter on March 12, 2014;

5

WHEREAS, based on the date on which the Complaint was served on

6
7

MagnaChip, Magnachip’s response to the Complaint is currently due on or before June 3, 2014;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court’s March 12, 2014 Order Setting Initial Case

8

Management Conference and ADR Deadlines, the Initial Case Management Conference is

9

scheduled for June 11, 2014;

10

WHEREAS, the Complaint sets forth claims under the federal securities laws that

11

are subject to the procedural requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of

12

1995 (the “PSLRA”), including those set forth in 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4;

13

WHEREAS, the PSLRA requires that, after filing a securities class action, the

14

plaintiff must give notice of the action to allow other interested shareholders the opportunity to

15

file motions for appointment as lead plaintiff (see 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)) and, thereafter, that

16

the Court appoint a lead plaintiff;

17

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2014, Keith Thomas moved for appointment as lead

18

plaintiff, responses to the motion are due by May 27, 2014, and the Court set July 3, 2014 as the

19

date for the hearing on the motion;

20

WHEREAS, the PSLRA provides that, upon the filing of a motion to dismiss by

21

the defendants in a private securities fraud action, all discovery and other proceedings shall be

22

stayed during the pendency of such motion (see 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(3)(B));

23

WHEREAS, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled

24

that the PSLRA stay of discovery during the pendency of a motion to dismiss includes a stay of

25

initial disclosures pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (see

26

Medhekar v. U.S. Dist. Court for the N. Dist. of Calif., 99 F.3d 325 (9th Cir. 1996));

27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF

-2-

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

WHEREAS, to avoid unnecessary expenditure of judicial resources and effort by

1
2

the parties and the Court, counsel for Plaintiff and MagnaChip have agreed (1) that Defendants

3

do not need to respond to the Complaint, or to any other related class action complaint that may

4

be filed in or transferred to this Court (“Related Action”) prior to the Court’s appointment of lead

5

plaintiff and (2) to continue the Initial Case Management Conference until after a lead plaintiff

6

has been appointed to represent the alleged class; and
WHEREAS the parties wish to move the hearing on the lead plaintiff motion to a

7
8

more convenient date;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by the undersigned

9
10
11

counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for MagnaChip as follows:
1.

Defendants are not required to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint or to

12

any Related Action by June 3, 2014, or at any time prior to the Court’s appointment of a lead

13

plaintiff.

14

2.

The hearing on the motion to appoint lead plaintiff and approval of lead counsel

15

previously scheduled for July 3, 2014 shall be continued to July 10, 2014, at 2:00 PM in

16

Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco.

17

3.

Within ten (10) days after the entry an order appointing lead plaintiff(s) and lead

18

counsel in the above-captioned action (or a consolidated action encompassing the above-

19

captioned action) pursuant to the PSLRA, the lead plaintiff(s) and Defendants shall confer and

20

propose to the Court dates by which lead plaintiff(s) shall either: (a) serve and file an amended

21

or consolidated class action complaint that shall serve as the operative complaint in the action

22

and shall supersede any other complaints filed in and/or transferred to this Court, or (b) notify

23

counsel for Defendants that the original complaint filed in this action shall be the operative

24

complaint in the action.

25

4.

If lead plaintiff(s) serves and files an amended or consolidated complaint,

26

Defendants shall have sixty (60) days following service to move or answer in response to that

27

complaint. If lead plaintiff(s) notifies Defendants that the original complaint shall serve as the

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF

-3-

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

1

operative complaint, any Defendant that has been served with the complaint shall move or

2

answer in response to the complaint no later than sixty (60) days after lead plaintiff(s) provides

3

such notice. If any Defendant files a motion to dismiss the complaint, lead plaintiff(s) shall have

4

sixty (60) days to respond to the motion, and Defendants shall have thirty (30) days to file their

5

reply brief(s).

6
7
8
9

5.

The Initial Case Management Conference, currently scheduled for June 11, 2014,

is hereby adjourned to such other date and time as this Court shall order.
6.

The May 21, 2014 deadline for the parties to meet and confer regarding initial

disclosures and other issues and the June 4, 2014 deadline for the parties to complete initial

10

disclosures or state objections in a Rule 26(f) report and to file a Case Management Statement

11

and Rule 26(f) report are hereby adjourned to such other date and time as this Court shall order.

12
13
14

7.

MagnaChip’s agreement to this Stipulation is without prejudice to and without

waiver of any of its defenses, objections, or arguments in this matter or any other matter.
8.

No previous request for extension of time has been made in this action.

15
Dated: May 21, 2014

Respectfully submitted,

16

19

JONES DAY
555 California Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

20

By:

17
18

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

/s/ John C. Tang
John C. Tang
[e-mail]
– and –

PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND,
WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
Daniel J. Kramer*
Robert N. Kravitz*
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF

-4-

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
– and –
Alex Young K Oh*
2001 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1047
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

1
2
3
4
5
6

(*Pro Hac Vice applications forthcoming)

7
Attorneys for Defendant MagnaChip
Semiconductor Corp.

8
9

I, John C. Tang, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this

10

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO

11

RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT

12

CONFERENCE AND HEARING TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF. In compliance with Civil

13

L.R. 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that the signatory below has concurred in this filing.

14
15
16
17
18

Dated: May 21, 2014
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

19
By:
20
21
22

/s/ Jeremy A. Lieberman
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
[e-mail]
– and –

23
24
25
26
27
28

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Lionel Z. Glancy
[e-mail]
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF

-5-

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

Michael Goldberg
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

1
2

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Richard Hayes

3
4
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.

S

UNIT
ED

Dated: May 23, 2014

The Hon. Jon S. Tigar
United States District Court ar
ig Judge

ER

n S. T

H

14

J u d ge J o

LI

RT

13

15

FO

NO

12

R NIA

ERED
O ORD
IT IS S
__________________________________

10
11

RT
U
O

9

ISTRIC
ES D
TC
T
TA

A

8

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE LEAD PLAINTIFF

-6-

MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST