Hayes v. Magnachip Semiconductor Corp. et al

Filing 48

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 47 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS' TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT filed by Magnachip Semiconductor Corp. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on October 22, 2014. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/22/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

JONES DAY
John C. Tang (SBN 212371)
[e-mail]
Kelsey Israel-Trummel (SBN 282272)
[e-mail]
555 California Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND,
WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
Daniel J. Kramer
Jacqueline P. Rubin
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
- and Alex Young K. Oh
2001 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1047
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.,
R. Douglas Norby, Ilbok Lee, and
Nader Tavakoli
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19
KEITH THOMAS and RICHARD HAYES,

CASE NO.: 3:14-cv-01160-JST

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Plaintiffs,
v.
MAGNACHIP SEMICONDUCTOR CORP., SANG
PARK, TAE YOUNG HWANG, MARGARET
SAKAI, R. DOUGLAS NORBY, ILBOK LEE,
NADER TAVAKOLI, RANDAL KLEIN,
MICHAEL ELKINS, and AVENUE CAPITAL
MANAGEMENT II, L.P.,

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS'
TIME TO RESPOND TO
CORRECTED AMENDED CLASS
ACTION COMPLAINT

Defendants.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

1

WHEREAS, plaintiff Richard Hayes filed a purported class action Complaint for

2

Violations of the Federal Securities Laws (the “Complaint”) against defendants MagnaChip

3

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

4

above-captioned action on March 12, 2014;

5

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Stipulation and Order Regarding Deadline for

6

Amended Complaint so ordered on July 16, 2014, plaintiffs Keith Thomas and Richard Hayes

7

(“Plaintiffs”) filed a purported class action Amended Complaint for Violations of the Federal

8

Securities Laws against defendants MagnaChip, Sang Park, Margaret Sakai, Tae Young Hwang,

9

Avenue Capital Management II, L.P., R. Douglas Norby, Ilbok Lee, Nader Tavakoli, Randal

10

Klein, and Michael Elkins (collectively, “Defendants”) in the above-captioned matter on

11

September 30, 2014;

12

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed a purported class action Corrected Amended

13

Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws (the “Corrected Amended Complaint”)

14

against Defendants on October 1, 2014.

15

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Stipulation and Order Extending Defendants’ Time

16

to Respond to Class Action Complaint and Continuing Case Management Conference and

17

Hearing on Motion to Approve Lead Plaintiff so ordered on May 23, 2014, the parties agreed

18

that defendants named in the Complaint shall have sixty (60) days following service to move or

19

answer in response to the Corrected Amended Complaint;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the May 23, 2014 Stipulation and Order, the current

20
21

deadline for moving or answering the Corrected Amended Complaint is December 1, 2014;

22

WHEREAS, in a Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange

23

Commission on March 11, 2014, MagnaChip disclosed that it will restate its financial

24

statements;

25
26

WHEREAS, in October 2014, MagnaChip similarly advised Plaintiffs that it
intends to restate its financial statements;

27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
-2MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

WHEREAS, the undersigned counsel reasonably expect that Plaintiffs will seek to

1
2

file a further amended complaint following such restatement;

3

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

4

the parties and the Court, the undersigned counsel have agreed: (i) to extend Defendants’ time to

5

answer or otherwise respond to the Corrected Amended Complaint to December 29, 2014 and

6

(ii) to afford Plaintiffs an opportunity to further amend their complaint if MagnaChip restates its

7

financial statements before December 29, 2014;
WHEREAS, the parties previously requested and were granted three extensions of

8
9

time;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by the undersigned

10
11
12

counsel as follows:
1.

Defendants’ time to answer or otherwise respond to the Corrected Amended

13

Complaint is extended until December 29, 2014. If any Defendant files a motion to dismiss the

14

Corrected Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs shall have sixty (60) days to respond to the motion(s),

15

and Defendants shall have thirty (30) days to file their reply brief(s).

16

2.

If MagnaChip restates its financial statements on or before December 29, 2014,

17

however, Defendants will not be required to answer or otherwise respond to the Corrected

18

Amended Complaint by December 29, 2014. Under such circumstances, Plaintiffs shall have

19

thirty (30) days from the date on which the restatement is filed with the U.S. Securities and

20

Exchange Commission to file and serve a further amended complaint. If Plaintiffs file and serve

21

a further amended complaint following a restatement by MagnaChip: (i) Defendants shall have

22

sixty (60) days following service to move or answer in response to that amended complaint; and

23

(ii) if any Defendant files a motion to dismiss that amended complaint, Plaintiffs shall have sixty

24

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

25

reply brief(s). If Plaintiffs do not file and serve a further amended complaint following a

26

restatement by MagnaChip: (i) Defendants shall have sixty (60) days following Plaintiffs’

27

deadline for filing the further amended complaint to answer or otherwise respond to the

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
-3MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

1

Corrected Amended Complaint; and (ii) if any Defendant files a motion to dismiss the Corrected

2

Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs shall have sixty (60) days to respond to the motion(s), and

3

Defendants shall have thirty (30) days to file their reply brief(s).

4

3.

Agreement to this Stipulation by the undersigned defendants’ counsel is without

5

prejudice to and without waiver of any of those defendants’ defenses, objections, or arguments in

6

this matter or any other matter.

7

Dated: October 22, 2014

8

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

9
10
11

By:
12
13
14

/s/ John C. Tang
John C. Tang
Kelsey Israel-Trummel
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Attorneys for Defendant MagnaChip
Semiconductor Corp.

15
16
17
18

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

19

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO

20

RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT. In compliance with

21

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

22
23

Dated: October 22, 2014

24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
-4MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

1
2
3

PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND,
WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
By:

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

/s/ Daniel J. Kramer
Daniel J. Kramer*
Jacqueline P. Rubin**
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
- and Alex Young K. Oh*
2001 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1047
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
*
Admitted pro hac vice
**
Pro hac vice application forthcoming

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Attorneys for Defendants MagnaChip
Semiconductor Corp., R. Douglas Norby,
Ilbok Lee, and Nader Tavakoli
AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER &
FELD LLP
One Bryant Park
Bank of America Tower
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

By:

/s/ Christopher M. Egleson
Michael A. Asaro**
Christopher M. Egleson
Steven F. Reich**
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
**
Pro hac vice applications forthcoming

Attorneys for Defendants Avenue
Capital Management II, Randal Klein,
and Michael Elkins
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST

1

POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

2
3
4

By:
5
6
7
8

/s/ Michael Wernke
Marc I. Gross
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Michael Wernke
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
- and –

9
10

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Lionel Z. Glancy
Michael Goldberg
Robert V. Prongay
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Keith Thomas and Richard Hayes

18
19
20

28

R NIA

n
J u d ge J o

ER

H

27

RT

26

NO

25

Honorable Jon S. Tigar
United States District Judge

S . Ti ga r

FO

24

LI

Dated: October 22, 2014

DERED
SO OR
_____________________________________
IT IS

A

23

UNIT
ED

22

S

IT IS SO ORDERED.

RT
U
O

21

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’ TIME TO RESPOND TO CORRECTED AMENDED
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
-2MagnaChip Semiconductor Corp.
3:14-cv-01160-JST