Dye v. GoPro, Inc. et al

Filing 15

STIPULATION AND ORDER. Case Management Statement due by 5/17/2018. Initial Case Management Conference reset for 5/24/2018 09:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 05, 17th Floor. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/6/18. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/6/2018)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

SUSAN S. MUCK (CSB No. 126930)
[e-mail]
CATHERINE D. KEVANE (CSB No. 215501)
[e-mail]
MARIE C. BAFUS (CSB No. 258417)
[e-mail]
VINCENT BARREDO (CSB No. 275518)
[e-mail]
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
415.875.2300
Facsimile:
415.281.1350
Attorneys for Defendants GoPro, Inc., Nicholas D.
Woodman and Brian T. McGee
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

SAN FRANCISCO

12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

11

13
14

NATHAN DYE, Individually and on Behalf of
All Others Similarly Situated,

15

Plaintiff,

16
17
18
19

v.
GOPRO, INC., NICHOLAS D. WOODMAN
AND BRIAN T. MCGEE,
Defendants.

Case No.: 3:18-cv-00248-WHA
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS’
TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE
RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT
AND CONTINUING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
ASSOCIATED DEADLINES
Date Action Filed: January 11, 2018

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. AND [PROP.] ORDER

Case No.: 3:18-cv-00248-WHA

1

WHEREAS, on January 11, 2018, Plaintiff Nathan Dye (“Plaintiff”), individually and on

2

behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a putative class action complaint captioned Dye v.

3

GoPro, Inc., et al., No. 3:18-cv-00248 against defendants GoPro, Inc., Nicholas Woodman, and

4

Brian McGee (collectively, “Defendants” and with Plaintiff, the “Parties”) alleging violations of

5

Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§

6

78j(b) and 78t(a), and Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 10b-5 promulgated

7

thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 (the “Complaint”);

8

WHEREAS, on January 12, 2018, this Court issued an Order Setting Initial case

9

Management Conference and ADR Deadlines (Dkt. No. 5) in the above-captioned action, setting

10

1.

March 29, 2018 for the parties to comply with certain requirements under the

SAN FRANCISCO

12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

11

the following deadlines:

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Northern District of California Civil

13

Local Rules (“Local Rules” or “Civ. L.R.”) and Alternative Dispute Resolution

14

(“ADR”) Local Rules regarding discovery, early settlement, and the ADR Multi-

15

Option Program;

16

2.

April 12, 2018 for the parties to file a Rule 26(f) Report, complete initial

17

disclosures or state objections in the Rule 26(f) Report, and file a Joint Case

18

Management Statement; and

19

3.

20

WHEREAS, the Complaint asserts claims under the federal securities laws that are subject

21

to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-67, 109 Stat. 737 (1995),

22

(“PSLRA”), which sets forth specialized procedures for the administration of securities class

23

actions, including a specific process for the appointment of a lead plaintiff and lead counsel to

24

represent the putative class;

April 19, 2018 at 11:00 a.m. for an initial case management conference;

25

WHEREAS, lead plaintiff and lead counsel have not yet been appointed pursuant to

26

Section 21D of the Securities Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4. The deadline to move for

27

appointment as lead plaintiff is March 12, 2018;

28
STIP. AND [PROP.] ORDER

1

Case No.: 3:18-cv-00248-WHA

1
2

WHEREAS, once a lead plaintiff is appointed, the Court will then appoint lead counsel.
See § 78u-4(a)(3)(B)(v);

3

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that in the interests of judicial economy, conservation of

4

time and resources, and orderly management of this action, no response to any pleading in this

5

action by any Defendant should occur until after (i) a lead plaintiff and lead counsel are appointed

6

by the Court pursuant to the PSLRA, and (iii) such lead plaintiff serves an amended or

7

consolidated complaint;
WHEREAS, the parties respectfully submit that good cause exists to vacate the April 19,

9

2018 initial case management conference and associated ADR deadlines until such time as the

10

Court has the opportunity to rule on the appointment of lead plaintiff and approval of lead

11

counsel; and

SAN FRANCISCO

12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

8

13

WHEREAS, the Parties hereby stipulate, and respectfully request the Court to order, as
follows:

14

1.

Within 14 days of an order by the Court appointing lead plaintiff and lead counsel,

15

Defendants and any lead plaintiff(s) appointed by the Court shall, through their respective

16

counsel, confer and jointly submit a proposed schedule for the filing of any amended complaint or

17

consolidated complaint and for the filing of a responsive pleading, including a briefing schedule

18

with respect to any anticipated motions to dismiss;

19

2.

Defendants shall not be required to answer, move, or otherwise substantively

20

respond to the Complaint until the date agreed upon by the Parties in the proposed schedule

21

described in paragraph 1 above, if approved by the Court, or until such other further order by the

22

Court.

23

3.

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-2, the initial case management conference scheduled for

24

April 19, 2018 shall be vacated, along with any associated deadlines under the Federal Rules of

25

Civil Procedure and Local Rules, to be rescheduled for a date after the filing of any consolidated

26

complaint or after the Court rules on Defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss, as the Court

27

determines to be appropriate; and all associated ADR Multi-Option Program deadlines likewise

28

be deferred.
STIP. AND [PROP.] ORDER

2

Case No.: 3:18-cv-00248-WHA

4.

1

Nothing in this Stipulation is intended in any way to waive or affect any rights,

2

claims, defenses, objections or arguments that any party may have with respect to any matter,

3

other than those expressly addressed and agreed in paragraphs 1 through 3 above.

4
Dated: January 24, 2018

6

By: /s/ Catherine D. Kevane
Catherine D. Kevane

7

Attorneys for Defendants GoPro, Inc., Nicholas D.
Woodman and Brian T. McGee

8
Dated: January 24, 2018

10

By: /s/ Shawn Williams
Shawn Williams
Attorneys for Plaintiff Nathan Dye

13

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), all signatories concur in filing this stipulation.
Dated: January 24, 2018

15
16

***

17

[PROPOSED] ORDER

18

Dated:

Joint CMC statement due

RT
U
O

5/17/18
S DISTRIC
The Honorable TE
William Alsup T C
TA
United States District Judge

22
23
24

NO

25

DERED
SO OR ED
IT IS
DIFI
AS MO

RT

26

dward
Judge E

ER

n
M. Che

H

27
28
STIP. AND [PROP.] ORDER

3

R NIA

21

a.m.
2/6/18

FO

20

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. CMC reset for 5/24/18 at 9:30

S

19

By: /s/ Catherine D. Kevane
Catherine D. Kevane

UNIT
ED

SAN FRANCISCO

12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW

F ENWICK & W EST LLP

11

14

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP

LI

9

FENWICK & WEST LLP

A

5

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

Case No.: 3:18-cv-00248-WHA