International Union of Operating Engineers Local 478 v. Hsu et al

Filing 34

STIPULATION AND RESCHEDULING ORDER. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 01/29/2015. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP BRETT M. MIDDLETON (Bar No. 199427) 12481 High Bluff Drive, Suite 300 San Diego, California 92130 Tel: (858) 793-0070 Fax: (858) 293-0323 brettm@blbglaw.com 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff International Union of Operating Engineers Local 478 7 [Additional Counsel on Signature Page] 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 13 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 478, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant IMPAX LABORATORIES, INC. 16 17 18 19 20 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] RESCHEDULING ORDER Plaintiff, 14 15 Case No.: 14-cv-04980-SC SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION vs. LARRY HSU, G. FREDERICK WILKINSON, LESLIE Z. BENET, ROBERT L. BURR, ALLEN CHAO, NIGEL T. FLEMING, MICHAEL MARKBREITER, MICHAEL J. NESTOR, MARY K. PENDERGAST, BRYAN M. REASONS, and PETER R. TERRERI, Defendants. 21 22 23 WHEREAS, on November 10, 2014, plaintiff International Union of Operating Engineers 24 Local 478 (“IUOE” or “Plaintiff”) by and through its counsel, initiated this shareholder 25 derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant Impax Laboratories, Inc. (“Impax”) and against 26 defendants Larry Hsu, G. Frederick Wilkinson, Leslie Z. Benet, Robert L. Burr, Allen Chao, 27 Nigel T. Fleming, Michael Markbreiter, Michael J. Nestor, Mary K. Pendergast, Bryan M. 28 Reasons, and Peter R. Terreri, (collectively, “Defendants”); 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] RESCHEDULING ORDER CASE NUMBER: 14-cv-04980-SC 1 WHEREAS, on December 17, 2014, Plaintiff and plaintiff in Wickey v. Larry Hsu, et al., 2 No. 14-cv-04266-JD (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) jointly filed an unopposed motion to consolidate 3 the Wickey and IUOE actions in front of the Honorable Judge Donato; 4 WHEREAS, on January 21, 2015, Judge Donato denied the Motion to Consolidate; 5 WHEREAS, based on Judge Donato’s denial of the Motion to Consolidate, Defendants’ 6 motion to dismiss is due within 30 days of such ruling (or February 20, 2015), pursuant to the 7 Stipulation and Rescheduling Order entered by this Court on January 5, 2015 (ECF No. 30); 8 WHEREAS, on January 26, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a Joint Administrative Motion To 9 Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related And Notice Of Pendency Of Other Action Or 10 Proceeding (the “Administrative Motion”) before Judge Donato; WHEREAS, on January 26, 2015, Plaintiff IUOE filed a Notice Of Pendency Of Other 11 12 Action Or Proceeding Pursuant To Civil Local Rule 3-13 in the above captioned action; WHEREAS Plaintiffs intend to file a renewed motion to consolidate the Wickey and 13 14 IUOE actions consistent with the outcome of the Administrative Motion, in the coming days; WHEREAS, if consolidated, Plaintiffs intend to file an amended consolidated complaint; 15 16 and 17 WHEREAS, the parties agree that it would be a waste of judicial resources for 18 Defendants to prepare and file a motion to dismiss prior to Judge Donato’s ruling on the renewed 19 motion to consolidate and, if granted, the amended consolidated complaint being filed; 20 21 22 NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties, by and through their counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 1. vacated. 23 24 The current February 20, 2015 deadline for Defendants’ motion to dismiss is 2. If Judge Donato grants Plaintiffs’ renewed motion for consolidation (or the Court 25 consolidates the Wickey and IUOE actions sua sponte), Defendants shall file and 26 serve their motion to dismiss within 45 days of plaintiffs filing an amended 27 consolidated complaint. 28 3. If the Court denies Plaintiffs’ renewed motion for consolidation, Defendants shall 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] RESCHEDULING ORDER CASE NUMBER: 14-cv-04980-SC D RDERE OO IT IS S R NIA S UNIT ED RT U O S DISTRICT TE C TA NO el Conti A H LI RT ER FO amu Judge S N F D IS T IC T O R C

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?