Clevlen v. Anthera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al

Filing 24

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 23 Setting Pleading and Briefing Schedule. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/5/17. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/5/2017)

1

4

Rosemary M. Rivas (State Bar No. 209147)
Email: [e-mail]
LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 650
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

5

Counsel for Lead Plaintiff Urešomir Čorak

6

[Additional counsel appear on signature page.]

2
3

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11

BRIAN CLEVLEN, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,

12
Plaintiff,
13

v.

14
15

ANTHERA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
PAUL F. TRUEX, CRAIG THOMPSON,
MAY LIU and WILLIAM SHANAHAN,

16

Case No.: 3:17-cv-00715-RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SETTING PLEADING AND BRIEFING
SCHEDULE

Defendants.

Courtroom:
Judge:

3, 17th Floor
Hon. Richard Seeborg

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SETTING PLEADING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Case No. 3:17-cv-00715-RS

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2 and 7-12, Lead Plaintiff Urešomir Čorak (“Plaintiff”) and

2

defendants Anthera Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Paul F. Truex, Craig Thompson, May Liu, and William

3

Shanahan (“Defendants,” and together with Plaintiff, the “Parties”), by and through their

4

undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate to set the pleading and briefing schedule in the

5

above-captioned action.

6

WHEREAS, on February 13, 2017, Brian Clevlen filed a complaint captioned Brian Clevlen

7

v. Anthera Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Paul F. Truex, Craig Thompson, May Liu, and William

8

Shanahan, No. 3:17-cv-00715-RS (the “Action”), a purported class action under the Private

9

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “PSLRA”) alleging violations of the federal

10

securities laws;

11

WHEREAS, on March 10, 2017, the Court entered an order (Dkt. No. 14) approving the

12

Parties’ joint stipulation extending Defendants’ time to respond to the complaint, vacating the Order

13

Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR Deadlines entered by the Court on February

14

14, 2017 (Dkt. No. 4), continuing all dates and deadlines pending disposition on Defendants’

15

anticipated motion(s) to dismiss, and ordering that the Initial Case Management Conference shall

16

be held thirty (30) days after an order directing Defendants to file an answer (if any), or as soon

17

as possible thereafter consistent with the Court’s schedule;

18
19

WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, pursuant to the PSLRA, Plaintiff filed a Motion for
Appointment as Lead Plaintiff and Approval of Counsel (Dkt. No. 16);

20

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2017, the Court entered an order (Dkt. No. 21) appointing Plaintiff

21

as lead plaintiff; and approving Plaintiff’s selection of Levi & Korsinsky LLP as lead counsel; and

22

WHEREAS, the Parties continue to believe that, because the PSLRA stays all discovery,

23

including initial disclosures, pending the disposition of motions to dismiss in securities actions such

24

as this one, it is appropriate to defer the initial case management conference and the completion of

25

initial disclosures until the lead plaintiff has filed a consolidated amended complaint, Defendants

26

have had the opportunity to file any motion to dismiss, and the Court has ruled on Defendants’

27

anticipated motion to dismiss. See, e.g., Medhekar v. United States Dist. Court, 99 F.3d 325, 328-

28

29 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)’s initial disclosure requirements are disclosures
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SETTING PLEADING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Case No. 3:17-cv-00715-RS

1

or other proceedings for purposes of PSLRA’s stay provision, and must be stayed pending

2

disposition of motion to dismiss);
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree, subject to the Court’s approval, as

3
4

follows:

5
6

1.

Defendants need not answer, move against or otherwise respond to the complaint in

the Action until Plaintiff files or designates an operative complaint;

7

2.

Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint, which will function as the operative

8

complaint, or designate an existing complaint as the operative complaint, on or before July 17,

9

2017;

10
11

3.

complaint on or before September 15, 2017;

12
13

4.

5.

If Plaintiff files opposition papers, Defendants shall file any reply papers on or

before December 15, 2017;

16
17

If Defendants move to dismiss the operative complaint, Plaintiff shall file any

opposition papers on or before November 15, 2017;

14
15

Defendants shall answer, move against, or otherwise respond to the operative

6.

This Stipulation is entered into without prejudice to any party seeking any interim

7.

Nothing in this Stipulation shall be construed as a waiver of any of Defendants’

relief;

18
19

rights or positions in law or equity, or as a waiver of any defenses that Defendants would otherwise

20

have, including, without limitation, jurisdictional defenses; and

21

8.

The Parties do not seek to stipulate to the foregoing schedule for the purpose of

22

delay, and the proposed dates will not have an effect on any pre-trial and trial dates as the Court

23

has yet to schedule these dates.

24
25
26
27

///

28

///
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SETTING PLEADING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Case No. 3:17-cv-00715-RS

1

WHEREFORE, the Parties respectfully request that this Court issue an order granting the

2

Parties’ request to set a pleading and briefing schedule and related deadlines as set forth herein.

3

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

4
5

Respectfully submitted,
Dated: June 1, 2017

LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP

6
7
8
9

By: /s/ Rosemary M. Rivas
Rosemary M. Rivas
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 650
San Francisco, CA 94104
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

10
Shannon L. Hopkins (to be admitted pro hac vice)
Stephanie A. Bartone (to be admitted pro hac vice)
LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
733 Summer Street, Suite 304
Stamford, CT 06901
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

11
12
13
14
15

Counsel for Lead Plaintiff Urešomir Čorak

16

Michael T. Jones (SBN 290660)
[e-mail]
Lloyd Winawer (SBN 157823)
[e-mail]
Nicholas A. Reider (SBN 296440)
[e-mail]
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
135 Commonwealth Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025-1105
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

17
18
19
20
21
22

Counsel for Defendants

23
24
25
26

FILER’S ATTESTATION
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1 regarding signatures, I attest under penalty of perjury that
the concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from all signatories.

27
28

/s/ Rosemary M. Rivas
Rosemary M. Rivas
4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SETTING PLEADING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Case No. 3:17-cv-00715-RS

1

*

*

*

2
ORDER
3
4

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED

5
6
7

Dated: 6/5

, 2017
HON. RICHARD SEEBORG
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
SETTING PLEADING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Case No. 3:17-cv-00715-RS