Securities And Exchange Commission v. Schroeder

Filing 218

STIPULATION AND ORDER AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER re 217 Pretrial Conference Statement. Close of Discovery due by 7/26/2010. Opening Brief due 7/26/2010. Opposition due by 9/17/2010. Reply due by 10/8/2010. Motion Hearing s et for 11/1/2010 09:00 AM. Preliminary Pretrial Conference statement due by 9/17/2010. Preliminary Pretrial Conference set for 9/27/2010 11:00 AM in Courtroom 8, 4th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge James Ware on 6/3/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2010)

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 KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP ELLIOT R. PETERS - #158708 epeters@kvn.com R. JAMES SLAUGHTER - #192813 rslaughter@kvn.com R. ADAM LAURIDSEN - #243780 alauridsen@kvn.com 710 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 Telephone: (415) 391-5400 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 SHIRLI F. WEISS shirli.weiss@dlapiper.com DAVID A. PRIEBE david.priebe@dlapiper.com JEFF COOPERSMITH jeff.coopersmith@dlapiper.com DLA PIPER LLP (US) 2000 University Avenue East Palo Alto, CA 94303 Telephone: (619) 699-2700 Facsimile: (619) 699-2701 Attorneys for Defendant KENNETH L. SCHROEDER UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA ER N F D IS T IC T O R UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. KENNETH L. SCHROEDER, Defendant. Case No. C-07-3798-JW (HRL) JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER 496084.01 JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER CASE NO. C-07-3798-JW (HRL) A C LI 6/3/2010 FO m Judge Ja es Ware R NIA DERED SO OR ED IT IS DIFI A S MO RT U 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 Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") and defendant Kenneth L. Schroeder respectfully submit this Joint Pretrial Statement and Proposed Amended Scheduling Order in advance of the Pretrial Conference set for June 7, 2010. WHEREAS the Court entered an amended scheduling order for this case on January 11, 2010 [Docket No. 204]; WHEREAS the Court's amended scheduling order requires the parties to submit preliminary pretrial conference statements by May 28, 2010; WHEREAS Mr. Schroeder, without admitting or denying the allegations of the complaint, consented to the entry of partial final judgment on March 31, 2010; WHEREAS Mr. Schroeder's consent to the entry of partial final judgment has not yet been considered by the Commission; WHEREAS if approved by the Commission and entered by the Court, the partial final judgment will resolve all aspects of this case except the issue of whether it is appropriate to enter an order, pursuant to Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78u(d)(2)], barring Mr. Schroeder from serving as an officer or director of any issuer required to file reports with the Commission pursuant to Sections 12(b), 12(g) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 781(b), 781(g), 780(d)]; WHEREAS, if the consent is approved by the Commission and entered by the Court, the Commission will submit a brief asking that the Court impose no more than a five-year bar and Mr. Schroeder would oppose the Commission's request by asking that no bar be imposed; WHEREAS the parties believe that the following extensions to the current deadlines set forth in the Court's amended discovery order would allow them to complete discovery and would permit sufficient time, approximately one month, for the Commission to consider the proposed consent, which if approved by the Commission would require only a briefing and argument on the officer and direct bar issue; IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, and the parties ask the Court to adopt as its amended scheduling order, the following: Close of All Discovery: July 26, 2010 1 496084.01 JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER CASE NO. C-07-3798-JW (HRL) 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 The Commission's Opening Brief on Officer and Director Bar Issue: July 26, 2010 Mr. Schroeder's Opposition Brief: September 17, 2010 The Commission's Reply Brief: October 8, 2010 Hearing: November 1, 2010 9:00 AM October 25, 2010 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED THAT, in the event the Commission does not approve the proposed consent by June 25, 2010, the parties will jointly notify the Court and will submit a proposed schedule for dispositive motions and trial. Dated: May 28, 2010 KEKER & VAN NEST LLP By: /s/ R. James Slaughter ________________ R. JAMES SLAUGHTER Attorneys for Defendant KENNETH L. SCHROEDER Dated: May 28, 2010 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION By: /s/ Mark P. Fickes ___________________ MARK P. FICKES Attorneys for Plaintiff SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Schroeder's undersigned counsel of record, R. James Slaughter, hereby attests that Mark P. Fickes concurs in the filing of this stipulation, in accordance with General Order No. 45, Electronic Case Filing, section 10(b). //// //// //// //// //// JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER CASE NO. C-07-3798-JW (HRL) 2 496084.01 UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA N 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 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.AS MODIFIED: The Preliminary Pretrial Conference set to June 7, 2010 is continued to September 27, 2010 at DATED: May ___, 2010 11:00 AM. On or before September 17, 2010, the parties shall file a joint statement updated the Court on the status of the parties' partial settlement efforts. Dated: June 3, 2010 ______________________________________ HON. JAMES WARE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE F D IS T IC T O R A 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER ER C 496084.01 JOINT PRETRIAL STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER CASE NO. C-07-3798-JW (HRL) LI FO Judge Jam es Ware 3 R NIA ED ORDER IT IS SO DIFIED AS MO RT U O NO RT H

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?