Dull v. Rackable Systems Inc. et al

Filing 45

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken 44 GRANTING Stipulation re Filing of Second Amended Complaint and Related Briefing Schedule. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken, on 12/28/09. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2009) Modified on 12/29/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP LIONEL Z. GLANCY (S.B.#134180) MICHAEL GOLDBERG (S.B.#196382) 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311 Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] - and Frederick W. Gerkens, III (pro hac vice) Robin B. Howald (S.B. #110280) 1430 Broadway, Suite 1603 New York, New York 10018 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT CALIFORNIA ___________________________________ ) IN RE RACKABLE SYSTEMS, INC. ) SECURITIES LITIGATION ) ___________________________________) ) THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) ALL ACTIONS ) ___________________________________) Case No. C-09-0222-CW CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING THE FILING AND BRIEFING OF PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON THE FILING AND BRIEFING OF PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. C-09-0222-Cw

0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WHEREAS, on June 15, 2009, Lead Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws ("Amended Complaint"); WHEREAS on August 13, 2009, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint, which motion was briefed by the parties; WHEREAS, on November 19, 2009, a hearing was held on Defendants' motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Court indicated: (a) The Court was taking the matter under submission to "take another look at it,"

but was "likely to dismiss with leave to amend" some or all of the allegations supporting Lead Plaintiffs' securities fraud claims (see Docket Entry No. 43, Hearing Transcript, at 13:21-23); (b) The Court had not ruled upon the motion from the bench, but would instead issue

an order ruling upon the pending motion to dismiss (see Hearing Transcript at 14:23-15:1; see also Docket Entry No. 42, Minute Order, indicating matter "Under Submission" with an Order to be prepared by the Court); and (c) That, with respect to those portions of the Amended Complaint dismissed with

leave to amend, the Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") should be filed during the "second week of January," 2010, and, following a six-week briefing schedule, the Case Management Conference will be conducted on May 11, 2010, "assuming the pleadings are settled by then" (see Hearing Transcript at 14:2-15:7; see also Docket Entry No. 42, Minute Order, Notes setting forth filing and briefing schedule; new Case Management Conference date); WHEREAS the parties respectfully submit that the most efficient manner in which to proceed would be for the parties to have the benefit of the Court's Order on the pending motion concerning the merits of the Amended Complaint before the SAC and briefing thereon is filed; WHEREAS the parties respectfully request one additional week be added to the time to file an opposition brief and a reply brief, to account for potential scheduling conflicts; and NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties hereby stipulate and agree, and respectfully request that the Court enter an order, as follows:
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON THE FILING AND BRIEFING OF PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. C-09-0222-Cw

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1.

Lead Plaintiffs shall file their Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") no

later than 21 days after entry of the Court's Order on the pending motion to dismiss; 2. a response; 3. Plaintiffs shall have 21 days after the filing of Defendants' response in Defendants shall have 21 days after the filing of the SAC in which to file

which to file any opposition; 4. which to file a reply. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Defendants shall have 14 days after the filing of Plaintiffs' opposition in

Dated: December 21, 2009

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP By: /s/ Fredeick W. Gerkens, III Frederick W. Gerkens, III (pro hac vice) Robin B. Howald (S.B. #110280) 1430 Broadway, Suite 1603 New York, New York 10018 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] - and ­ Lionel Z. Glancy (S.B.#134180) Michael Goldberg (SB#188669) 1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311 Los Angeles, CA, 90067 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail] Lead Counsel for Plaintiff and the Class

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON THE FILING AND BRIEFING OF PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. C-09-0222-Cw

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ON THE FILING AND BRIEFING OF PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. C-09-0222-Cw

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

Dated: December 21, 2009

By:

s/ Meredith N. Landy Meredith N. Landy

Attorneys for Defendants Rackable Systems, Inc., Thomas K. Barton and Madhu Ranganathan

I, Frederick W. Gerkens, III am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding the Filing and Briefing of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Meredith N. Landy has concurred in this filing.

By: Frederick W. Gerkens, III Frederick W. Gerkens, III (pro hac vice)

ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 12/28 DATED: __________, 2009 The Honorable Claudia Wilken United States District Judge

3