The New York City Employees' Retirement System et al v. Berry

Filing 44

ORDER Defendants' Motion to Consolidate Cases DENIED without prejudice, giving defendants leave to renew this motion pending resolution of the Motion to Dismiss in the Berry action. Vacating Case Management Conferences. The Case Management Conferences set for 10/6/2008 are VACATED. Signed by Judge James Ware on October 1, 2008. (jwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2008) Modified docket text on 10/6/2008 (ecg, COURT STAFF). Modified on 7/2/2009 (cv, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION In re Juniper Networks, Inc. Securities Litigation NO. C 06-04327 JW NO. C 08-00246 JW ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES; VACATING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES / Presently before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Consolidate Related Cases. (hereafter, "Motion," Docket Item No. 144.) Defendants seek to consolidate In re Juniper Networks, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. C 06-04327 JW, with The New York City Employees' Retirement System v. Lisa Berry, Case No. C 08-0246 JW. Plaintiffs in both actions have filed timely responses to Defendants' motion. (See Docket Item No. 146 in C 06-04327; Docket Item No. 39 in C 080246.) Defendants contend that these cases should be consolidated because they involve common questions of law and fact. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a). Plaintiffs collectively contend that Defendants' motion is merely a tactical move to invoke a global stay of the Juniper action. The Court finds that consolidation is inappropriate at this time. Consolidation of these actions would result in an automatic stay of discovery under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act,1 because Defendant in the Berry action has filed a Motion to Dismiss. Given that the two
1

United United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(3)(B).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

actions were filed well over one year apart, and that Plaintiffs in the Juniper action have already overcome a Motion to Dismiss, discovery in the Juniper action should proceed. Although Defendants' contention that the two actions should be consolidated is not without merit, the Court finds that consideration of this issue will be more appropriate following resolution of the Motion to Dismiss in the related Berry action. To consolidate these actions now would be unduly prejudicial to Plaintiffs, who are ready to commence discovery in the Juniper action, having survived a Motion to Dismiss in March, 2008. (See Docket Item No. 133.) Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendants' Motion to Consolidate without prejudice, giving Defendants' leave to renew this Motion pending resolution of the Motion to Dismiss in the Berry action. In light of this Order, the Court VACATES the Case Management Conferences presently scheduled for October 6, 2008 for both cases. With respect to the Juniper action, the Court refers the parties to the assigned Magistrate Judge, Judge Trumbull, to meet and confer and to develop a good faith discovery plan. The parties shall contact Judge Trumbull's Chambers within ten (10) days from the date of this Order to schedule their conference. Within ten (10) days following the parties' conference with Judge Trumbull, the parties shall file a Stipulated Discovery Plan for the Court's approval, including a proposed date for the close of all discovery. With respect to the Berry action, since Defendant has filed and noticed her Motion to Dismiss for January 12, 2009, the Court will set a new conference date in its Order addressing that motion.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated: October 1, 2008

JAMES WARE United States District Judge

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO: Alfred Glenn Yates [e-mail] Barbara J. Hart [e-mail] David C. Harrison [e-mail] David Michael Friedman [e-mail] James Neil Kramer [e-mail] Jason T. Baker [e-mail] Jonathan Acker Shapiro [e-mail] Joni L. Ostler [e-mail] Joseph M. Barton [e-mail] Mark Cotten Molumphy [e-mail] Melinda Haag [e-mail] Michael M. Goldberg [e-mail] Mozhgan Saniefar [e-mail] Patrice L. Bishop [e-mail] Patrick Edward Gibbs [e-mail] Peter Allen Wald [e-mail] Peter Arthur Binkow [e-mail] Rebecca Felice Lubens [e-mail] Reed R. Kathrein [e-mail] Richard Bemporad [e-mail] Richard W. Cohen [e-mail] Robert C. Schubert [e-mail] Steven Guggenheim [e-mail] Viviann C Stapp [e-mail] Willem F. Jonckheer [e-mail] William M. Audet [e-mail]

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated: October 1, 2008

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: /s/ JW Chambers Elizabeth Garcia Courtroom Deputy