Fleming v. Impax Laboratories Inc. et al

Filing 104

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 103 Stipulation Continuing Deadlines for Replies in Support of Motion to Intervene and Motion to Dismiss. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/26/2021)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LATHAM & WATKINS LLP Peter A. Wald (Bar No. 85705) Morgan E. Whitworth (Bar No. 304907) peter.wald@lw.com morgan.whitworth@lw.com 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111-6538 Telephone: 415.391.0600 Facsimile: 415.395.8095 Christopher S. Turner (admitted pro hac vice) Riley T. Keenan (admitted pro hac vice) christopher.turner@lw.com riley.keenan@lw.com 555 Eleventh Street, NW, Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20004-1304 Telephone: 202.637.2200 Facsimile: 202.637.2201 12 Attorneys for Defendants Impax Laboratories, LLC, Carole Ben-Maimon, Larry Hsu, Bryan M. Reasons, and George Frederick Wilkinson 13 Additional Counsel on Signature Page 11 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 16 OAKLAND DIVISION 17 18 GREG FLEMING, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 19 20 21 22 v. Plaintiff, IMPAX LABORATORIES, INC., et al., Defendants, CASE NO. 4:16-cv-06557-HSG CLASS ACTION STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINES FOR REPLIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO INTERVENE AND MOTION TO DISMISS 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO STIP. AND ORDER CONTINUING REPLY DEADLINE CASE NO. 4:16-cv-06557-HSG 1 WHEREAS, this is a putative securities class action filed by Lead Plaintiff New York 2 Hotel Trades Council & Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund against 3 Defendants Impax Laboratories LLC (formerly known as Impax Laboratories, Inc.)1, George 4 Frederick Wilkinson, Larry Hsu, Bryan M. Reasons, and Carole Ben-Maimon (collectively, 5 “Defendants” and, together with Lead Plaintiff, the “Parties”); 6 WHEREAS, on April 1, 2021, this action was remanded from the Ninth Circuit; 7 WHEREAS, on April 5, 2021, Lead Plaintiff and putative intervenor Sheet Metal 8 Workers’ Pension Plan of Southern California, Arizona & Nevada (“Sheet Metal Workers’ Fund”) 9 jointly moved to allow Sheet Metal Workers’ Fund to intervene as an additional named plaintiff 10 to represent the class (Dkt. No. 93); 11 12 WHEREAS, on April 19, 2021, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 96); 13 WHEREAS, on April 20, 2021, the Court held a case management conference; 14 WHEREAS, On April 22, 2021, the Court entered an Order Setting Briefing Schedule and 15 Hearing for the Motion to Intervene and Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 98). Pursuant to the Parties’ 16 Proposed Schedule, (Dkt. No. 95), the Court set May 31, 2021 as the deadline for Lead Plaintiff 17 and Sheet Metal Workers’ Fund to file a reply in support of Sheet Metal Workers’ Fund’s motion 18 to intervene, and Defendants to file a reply in support of their motion to dismiss; 19 20 WHEREAS, given that May 31, 2021 is a federal holiday, the parties respectfully submit that good cause exists to move the deadline for these replies to Tuesday, June 1, 2021; 21 22 IT IS ACCORDINGLY STIPULATED, by and between the undersigned counsel for the Parties, that: 23 1. Lead Plaintiff and Sheet Metal Workers’ Fund shall file any reply in support of 24 Sheet Metal Workers’ Fund’s motion to intervene, and Defendants shall file any reply in support 25 of their motion to dismiss, on or before June 1, 2021. 26 27 28 ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO 1 As described further in Impax’s Amended Certification of Interested Entities, ECF No. 70, Impax is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC. 1 STIP. AND ORDER CONTINUING REPLY DEADLINE CASE NO. 4:16-cv-06557-HSG 1 Dated: May 25, 2021 2 Respectfully submitted, LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 3 By: /s/ Peter A. Wald Peter A. Wald (Bar No. 85705) peter.wald@lw.com Morgan E. Whitworth (Bar No. 304907) morgan.whitworth@lw.com 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415.391.0600 Facsimile: 415.395.8095 4 5 6 7 8 Christopher S. Turner (admitted pro hac vice) christopher.turner@lw.com Riley T. Keenan (admitted pro hac vice) riley.keenan@lw.com 555 Eleventh Street, NW, Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20004 Telephone: 202.637.2200 Facsimile: 202.637.2201 9 10 11 12 13 Counsel for Defendants Impax Laboratories, LLC, Carole Ben-Maimon, Larry Hsu, Bryan M. Reasons, and George Frederick Wilkinson. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO DATED: May 25, 2021 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP By: /s/ Erika Oliver Spencer A. Burkholz Luke O. Brooks Eric I. Niehaus Angel P. Lau Jeffrey J. Stein Erika Oliver Natalie F. Lakosil 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax) Shawn A. Williams Post Montgomery Center One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: 415/288-4545 415/288-4534 (fax) Samuel H. Rudman 2 STIP. AND ORDER CONTINUING REPLY DEADLINE CASE NO. 4:16-cv-06557-HSG 1 3 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: 631/367-7100 631/367-1173 (fax) 4 Lead Counsel for Plaintiff 2 5 6 7 SIGNATURE ATTESTATION I am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to file the foregoing 8 Stipulation. Pursuant to L.R 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I, Peter A. Wald, attest that 9 concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained. 10 11 DATED: May 25, 2021 /s/ Peter A. Wald Peter A. Wald (Bar No. 85705) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO 3 STIP. AND ORDER CONTINUING REPLY DEADLINE CASE NO. 4:16-cv-06557-HSG 1 PURSUANT TO THE FOREGOING STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 4 DATED: 5/26/2021 ___________________________ Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. United States District Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO 4 STIP. AND ORDER CONTINUING REPLY DEADLINE CASE NO. 4:16-cv-06557-HSG

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?