Filing 39

ORDER APPOINTING LEAD PLAINTIFF AND LEAD COUNSEL 10 10 13 13 . (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 7/26/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LEONARD DESILVIO, Plaintiff, 8 ORDER APPOINTING LEAD PLAINTIFF AND LEAD COUNSEL v. 9 10 LION BIOTECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 17-cv-02086-SI Defendants. Re: Dkt. Nos. 10, 13, 20 12 Before the Court are three motions. Dkt. Nos. 10, 13, 20.1 The motions seek consolidation 13 of two related actions, Desilvio v. Lion Biotechnologies, Inc., 17-cv-2086-SI and Kuc v. Lion 14 Biotechnologies, Inc., 17-cv-2188-SI. Three separate movants each originally sought appointment 15 as lead plaintiff in this putative securities class action. The movants are: (1) Kimberly Colautti 16 and Michele Rosati (together, “Colautti and Rosati”), Dkt. No. 10; (2) Jay Rabkin (“Rabkin”), 17 Dkt. No. 13; and (3) Su Yee Lynn Ho, Sriram Sundareswaran, Manfred E. Strauch, and Kevin 18 Fong (together, the “Lion Investor Group” or “LIG”), Dkt. No. 20. However, Colautti and Rosati 19 filed a statement of non-opposition to the competing motions, Dkt. No. 24, and the Lion Investor 20 Group has withdrawn its motion, Dkt. No. 37. In addition, the plaintiff in the Kuc action has 21 voluntarily dismissed that case. See Kuc, 3:17-cv-2188-SI, Dkt. No. 11. 22 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court determines that this matter is appropriate for 23 resolution without oral argument and VACATES the hearing scheduled for July 28, 2017. The 24 Court hereby GRANTS Rabkin’s unopposed motion for appointment as lead counsel, GRANTS 25 Rabkin’s request for appointment of Kessler Topaz as class counsel, DENIES Colautti and 26 Rosati’s and LIG’s competing motions, and DENIES AS MOOT the motions to consolidate. 27 28 1 Unless otherwise noted, ECF docket entries refer to the Desilvio action, 3:17-cv-2086-SI. 1 The Desilvio complaint is now the operative complaint in this case. To the extent he has 2 not already done so, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to serve defendant with the complaint. 3 Defendants then have either 21 days from the date of service or 21 days from the date of this 4 order, whichever is later, to file a responsive pleading or motion. 5 6 This order resolves Dkt. Nos. 10, 13, 20. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 Dated: July 26, 2017 ______________________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?