In re: UTSTARCOM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION

Filing 336

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON CLASS CERTIFICATION MOTION FROM 1/25/2010 TO 2/22/2010 re 332 Stipulation, 325 MOTION to Certify Class Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion and Motion for Class Certification. Objections due by 12/18/2009. Replies due by 1/22/2010. Motion Hearing set for 2/22/2010 09:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge James Ware on 11/17/2009. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2009)

Download PDF
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 UNIT ED TERRY T. JOHNSON, State Bar No. 121569 (tjohnson@wsgr.com) BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838 (boris.feldman@wsgr.com) BAHRAM SEYEDIN-NOOR, State Bar No. 203244 (bnoor@wsgr.com) CHERYL W. FOUNG, State Bar No. 108868 (cfoung@wsgr.com) BRYAN J. KETROSER, State Bar No 239105 (bketroser@wsgr.com) L. DAVID NEFOUSE, State Bar No. 243417 (dnefouse@wsgr.com) IST RIC SD WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI TC TE A 650 Page Mill Road T Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: (650) 493-9300 D Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 RDERE RT U O S F D IS T IC T O NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA R SAN JOSE DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICTECOURT R N IN RE UTSTARCOM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION This Document Relates to: ALL ACTIONS. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Master File No. C-04-4908-JW(PVT) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. C-04-4908-JW(PVT) A C LI FO mes Wa Judge Ja re R NIA Attorneys for Defendants UTSTARCOM, INC., HONG LIANG LU, MICHAEL J. SOPHIE, YING WU and THOMAS J. TOY O IT IS S O NO RT H 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 and WHEREAS, on July 1, 2009, this Court entered an Order Staying Case Until Completion of Mediation that, inter alia, required plaintiffs to file their Motion for Class Certification on October 23, 2009; required defendants to file their oppositions to class certification on November 20, 2009; required plaintiffs to file their reply in support of class certification on December 18, 2009; and set the class certification hearing for January 25, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.; WHEREAS, on September 14, 2009, the parties engaged in mediation before the Honorable Edward A. Infante; WHEREAS, on October 23, 2009, plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification; WHEREAS, the parties wish to continue negotiations in an effort to settle this case; NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the parties' stipulation and subject to the Court's approval: 1. Defendants shall file and serve their oppositions to plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification on December 18, 2009; 2. Plaintiffs shall file and serve their reply in support of their Motion for Class Certification on January 22, 2010; and 3. The hearing on plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification shall be on February 22, 2010. February 22, 2010 at 9 a.m. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: November 12, 2009 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation By: /s/ BRYAN J. KETROSER BRYAN J. KETROSER Attorneys for Defendants UTSTARCOM, INC., HONG LIANG LU, MICHAEL J. SOPHIE, YING WU, THOMAS J. TOY STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. C-04-4908-JW(PVT) -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 Dated: November 12, 2009 SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP By: /s/ JASON DE BRETTEVILLE JASON DE BRETTEVILLE Attorneys for Defendants SOFTBANK HOLDINGS, INC. SOFTBANK AMERICA, INC. AND SOFTBANK CORPORATION Dated: November 12, 2009 COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP By: /s/ CHRIS SEEFER CHRIS SEEFER Attorneys for Plaintiffs ORDER PURSUANT TO THIS STIPULATION, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 17, 2009 The Honorable James Ware United States District Court Judge STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE CLASS CERTIFICATION BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. C-04-4908-JW(PVT) -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?