Bristow v. SunPower Corporation et al

Filing 84

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 83 Scheduling. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 8/28/17. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2017)

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

Lionel Z. Glancy (SBN 134180)
Robert V. Prongay (SBN 270796)
Charles H. Linehan (SBN 307439)
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Counsel for Plaintiff Kenneth Bristow and
Co-Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and the Class
[Additional Counsel listed on signature page]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Master File No. 3:16-cv-4710-RS
IN RE SUNPOWER CORPORATION
SECURITIES LITIGATION
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
SCHEDULING ORDER

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS

1

WHEREAS, on August 16, 2016, Plaintiff Kenneth Bristow filed a complaint in this

2

Court alleging claims under the federal securities laws against Defendants SunPower

3

Corporation, Thomas H. Werner, and Charles D. Boynton (collectively, “Defendants”) (see Dkt.

4

No. 1, Bristow v. SunPower Corporation, et al., No. 16-cv-04710-RS);

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

WHEREAS, on August 26, 2016, Plaintiff Jay Patel filed a related action alleging claims
under the federal securities laws against Defendants (Patel v. SunPower Corporation, et al., No.
16-cv-04915-WHO);
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2016, the Court consolidated the related actions, Mundeog
Seol was appointed as lead plaintiff, and his selection of Brower Piven, P.C. as lead counsel and
Finkelstein Thompson, LLP as liaison counsel for the class was approved pursuant to the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “PSLRA”) (see Dkt. No. 52);

12
WHEREAS, on February 23, 2017, the Court entered an order granting then-Lead
13
Plaintiff Mundeog Seol until March 31, 2017 to file a consolidated complaint (Dkt. No. 57);
14
15
16
17
18
19

WHEREAS, on March 31, 2017, then-Lead Plaintiff Mundeog Seol moved to withdraw
from this action (Dkt. No. 58);
WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017, the Court granted Mundeog Seol’s motion to withdraw,
and reopened the PSLRA lead plaintiff appointment process (see Dkt. No. 66);
WHEREAS, on July 21, at the conclusion of the new PSLRA lead plaintiff motion

20

period, two motions for appointment as lead plaintiff were filed: one by the SunPower Investor

21

Group (Dkt. No. 74), and one by JianFei Huang and Gregory Binkiewicz (“Huang and

22

Binkiewicz”) (Dkt. No. 70);

23

WHEREAS, on August 4, 2017, the SunPower Investor Group filed its opposition to

24

Huang and Binkiewicz’s lead plaintiff motion (Dkt. No 77), and Defendants filed their response

25

to the lead plaintiff motions, stating “Defendants take no position as to whom the Court should

26

appoint as a new lead plaintiff and/or lead counsel” (Dkt. No. 76);

27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

WHEREAS, on August 8, 2017, Huang and Binkiewicz filed their opposition to the
SunPower Investor Group’s lead plaintiff motion (Dkt. No. 78);
WHEREAS, on August 10, 2017, Huang and Binkiewicz withdrew their motion for
appointment as lead plaintiffs (see Dkt. No. 79);
WHEREAS, on August 21, 2017, this Court appointed the SunPower Investor Group
members as Lead Plaintiffs, and approved Lead Plaintiffs’ selection of The Rosen Law Firm,
P.A. and Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP as Co-Lead Counsel (see Dkt. No. 82);
WHEREAS, this case involves complex factual issues, and is subject to a heightened
pleading standard under the PSLRA;
WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiffs intend to file a consolidated complaint to ensure diligent
prosecution of this action;

12
WHEREAS, Defendants anticipate filing a motion to dismiss the consolidated
13
complaint;
14
15
16
17
18
19

WHEREAS, there is currently no schedule in place for the filing of a consolidated
complaint or the filing of a motion to dismiss, and the parties hereto desire to establish such a
schedule;
WHEREAS, counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and counsel for Defendants have conferred
regarding an appropriate schedule for the filing of a consolidated complaint and a motion to

20

dismiss, and Defendants agreed to a schedule that accommodates the expected birth (in mid-

21

September) of the first child of one of the primary Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP partners

22

handling this case, and additionally, prior commitments of the various counsels.

23

THEREFORE, IT IS ACCORDINGLY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and

24

between the undersigned counsel for the parties, and subject to the Court’s approval, as follows:

25

1.

Lead Plaintiffs shall file a consolidated complaint by October 17, 2017;

26

2.

Defendants shall answer, move or otherwise respond to the consolidated

27

complaint by December 18, 2017; and

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS
2

1

3.

If Defendants file a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint, Lead Plaintiffs

2

shall file an opposition to the motion to dismiss by January 26, 2018, and Defendants shall file a

3

reply to Lead Plaintiffs’ opposition by February 27, 2018.

4
5

Dated: August 25, 2017

GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

By: s/ Robert V. Prongay
Lionel Z. Glancy
Robert V. Prongay
Charles H. Linehan
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Counsel for Plaintiff Kenneth Bristow and Co-Lead
Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and the Class

14

19

THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
Laurence M. Rosen
Phillip Kim
275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

20

Co-Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and the Class

15
16
17
18

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS
3

1
2

Dated: August 25, 2017

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

7

By: s/ Steven M. Schatz
Steven M. Schatz
Diane Marie Walters
650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

8

Counsel for Defendants

3
4
5
6

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS
4

ATTESTATION

1
2

I, Robert V. Prongay, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being

3

used to file this Proposed Order of Consolidation. In compliance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I

4

hereby attest that Counsel for Defendants concur in this filing.

5
6
7

DATED: August 25, 2017

/s/ Robert V. Prongay
ROBERT V. PRONGAY

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS
5

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2
3

Based on the foregoing stipulation, and the good cause shown therein, the Court
GRANTS the parties’ stipulation. The Court Hereby orders as follows:

4

1.

Lead Plaintiffs shall file a consolidated complaint by October 17, 2017;

5

2.

Defendants shall answer, move or otherwise respond to the consolidated

6
7
8
9

complaint by December 18, 2017; and
3.

If Defendants file a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint, Lead Plaintiffs

shall file an opposition to the motion to dismiss by January 26, 2018, and Defendants shall file a
reply to Lead Plaintiffs’ opposition by February 27, 2018.

10
11

8/28/17
DATED: __________________

12
13
Hon. Richard Seeborg
U.S. District Court Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER – 3:16-cv-4710-RS
6