Vogel et al v. Apple, Inc. et al

Filing 16

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULING AND RELATED MATTERS (approving 15 ). Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 4/8/2010. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/8/2010)

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

JAY W. EISENHOFER (admitted pro hac vice) MICHAEL J. BARRY (admitted pro hac vice) GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A. Chase Manhattan Centre 1201 N. Market Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs GEORGE A. RILEY (S.B. #118304) O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center 28th Floor San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant APPLE INC. (additional counsel listed on signature page)

**E-Filed 4/8/2010**

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION MARTIN VOGEL and KENNETH MAHONEY, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. STEVEN P. JOBS, PETER OPPENHEIMER, FRED ANDERSON, WILLIAM V. CAMPBELL, MILLARD S. DREXLER, ALBERT GORE, JR., ARTHUR D. LEVINSON, JEROME P. YORK and APPLE COMPUTER, INC., Defendants. (caption continued on following page) Department: Ctrm 3, 5th Floor Judge: Honorable Jeremy Fogel Case No. C06-05208-JF STIPULATION AND -----------------[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULING AND RELATED MATTERS

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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

MARTIN VOGEL and KENNETH MAHONEY, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. APPLE, INC., STEVEN P. JOBS, FRED ANDERSON, NANCY HEINEN, WILLIAM V. CAMPBELL, MILLARD S. DREXLER, ARTHUR D. LEVINSON, and JEROME P. YORK Defendants.

Case No. C08-03123-JF

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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 August 24, 2006, plaintiffs Vogel and Mahoney filed a class action complaint in this Court alleging that certain defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), including § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and § 20(a). That action is styled as Martin Vogel and Kenneth Mahoney v. Steven Jobs, et al., Case No. 5:06-cv05208-JF (N.D. Cal.) ("Vogel I"); WHEREAS, on January 19, 2007, this Court appointed the New York City Employees' Retirement System ("NYCERS") as Lead Plaintiff in Vogel I and Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. as Lead Counsel in Vogel I; WHEREAS, on March 23, 2007, NYCERS filed, as Lead Plaintiff, the Consolidated Complaint and asserted claims under §§ 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and for the alleged breach of the common law duty of disclosure. The Consolidated Complaint did not assert any claims for alleged violations of §10(b) of the Exchange Act or Rule 10b-5 thereunder; WHEREAS, on November 14, 2007, this Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint ("Dismissal Order"); WHEREAS, on December 14, 2007, NYCERS filed a motion for leave to file a First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint to assert claims for alleged violations of § 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; WHEREAS, on May 14, 2008, this Court denied NYCERS's motion for leave to file a First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint ("Denial Order"); WHEREAS, on June 12, 2008, this Court entered Judgment for the defendants ("Judgment"); WHEREAS, on June 17, 2008, NYCERS filed its Notice of Appeal of the Dismissal Order, the Denial Order, and the Judgment ("NYCERS's Appeal"); WHEREAS, on June 27, 2008, plaintiffs Vogel and Mahoney filed a new class action complaint in this Court alleging that certain defendants violated the Exchange Act, including § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and § 20(a). That action is styled Martin Vogel and Kenneth Mahoney v. Apple Inc., et al., Case No. 5:08-cv-03123-JF (N.D. Cal.) ("Vogel II");

-1-

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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, pursuant to the parties' stipulation, on July 22, 2008, this Court entered an Order staying Vogel II pending resolution of NYCERS's Appeal; WHEREAS, on January 28, 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in NYCERS's Appeal affirming the Dismissal Order and reversing the Denial Order; WHEREAS, on February 19, 2010, the Ninth Circuit issued a mandate in NYCERS's Appeal; WHEREAS, on March 22, 2010, NYCERS filed a First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint in Vogel I captioned In Re Apple Inc. PSLRA Backdating Litigation ("First Amended Complaint"); WHEREAS, the Court has scheduled a Case Management Conference in Vogel I on April 30, 2010, at 10:30 a.m.; WHEREAS, the Court has scheduled a Case Management Conference in Vogel II on April 9, 2010, at 10:30 a.m.; WHEREAS, the parties believe that Vogel I and Vogel II concern substantially the same parties, transactions or events and involve common questions of law or fact, and should be deemed related pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12 and consolidated pursuant to Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to avoid unnecessary cost or delay; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE, AND THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS, THAT: 1. Vogel I and Vogel II shall be deemed related pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-

12 and Vogel II shall be consolidated with Vogel I pursuant to Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)(B). NYCERS shall be Lead Plaintiff and Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. shall be Lead Counsel with respect to the consolidated action. 2. The docket in Vogel I (Case No. 5:06-cv-05208-JF) shall constitute the Master

Docket for this proceeding. // // // -2STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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

3.

Every pleading in this proceeding shall bear the following caption: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

IN RE APPLE INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:

) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. C06-05208-JF CLASS ACTION

4.

When a pleading is intended to be applicable to all actions to which this

Order is applicable, the phrase "All Actions" shall appear immediately after the words "This Document Relates To:" in the caption set out above. When a pleading is intended to be applicable only to some, but not all, of such actions, the document shall list, immediately after the phrase "This Document Relates To:", the docket number for each individual action to which the document applies, along with the last name of the first-listed plaintiff in any such action. 5. The Case Management Conference set for April 9, 2010, at 10:30 a.m. in

Vogel II shall be vacated. 6. The Case Management Conference set for April 30, 2010, at 10:30 a.m. in

Vogel I shall remain on calendar. 7. The First Amended Complaint filed in Vogel I shall be the operative

complaint for the consolidated action. Plaintiffs shall re-file the First Amended Complaint with a corrected caption page to reflect the caption for the consolidated action. This consolidation does not affect any separate right or defense asserted in any of the consolidated actions. 8. June 25, 2010. 9. In the event that Defendants respond to the First Amended Complaint by Defendants shall file their responses to the First Amended Complaint by

filing motions, the briefing and hearing schedule for Defendants' motions will be: -3STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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 10.

Plaintiffs' Oppositions Due: Defendants' Replies Due: Hearing:

July 27, 2010 August 17, 2010 To be set by the Court.

Defendants shall not be required to file any responsive pleading to the

pending complaint in Vogel II. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: April 7, 2010 GEORGE A. RILEY O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP By: /s/ George A. Riley George A. Riley

Attorneys for Defendant APPLE INC.

Dated: April 7, 2010

DOUGLAS R. YOUNG (S.B. #73248) FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL LLP Russ Building 235 Montgomery Street, 17th floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] By: /s/ Douglas R. Young Douglas R. Young

Attorneys for Defendants STEVEN P. JOBS, WILLIAM V. CAMPBELL, MILLARD S. DREXLER, ARTHUR D. LEVINSON and JEROME B. YORK

-4-

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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: April 7, 2010

JEROME C. ROTH (S.B. #159483) YOHANCE C. EDWARDS (S.B. #237244) MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 560 Mission Street, 27th Floor San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] [e-mail] By: /s/ Yohance C. Edwards Yohance C. Edwards

Attorneys for Defendants FRED D. ANDERSON and NANCY R. HEINEN Dated: April 7, 2010

JAY W. EISENHOFER (admitted pro hac vice) MICHAEL J. BARRY (admitted pro hac vice) GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A. Chase Manhattan Centre 1201 N. Market Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] [e-mail] By: /s/ Michael J. Barry Michael J. Barry

MERRILL GLEN EMERICK (SB# 117248) ANDERLINI & EMERICK LLP 411 Borel Avenue, Suite 501 San Mateo, California 94402 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Lead Plaintiff THE NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM

-5-

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF

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: April 7, 2010

PATRICE L. BISHOP (S.B. #182256) STULL, STULL & BRODY 10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2300 Los Angeles, California 90024 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] By: /s/ Patrice L. Bishop Patrice L. Bishop

Howard T. Longman STULL, STULL & BRODY 6 East 45th Street New York, NY 10017 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Gary S. Graifman KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER & GRAIFMAN 747 Chestnut Ridge Road Chestnut Ridge, New York 10977 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiffs MARTIN VOGEL and KENNETH MAHONEY I, George A. Riley, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Scheduling and Related Matters. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Douglas R. Young, Yohance C. Edwards, Michael J. Barry, and Patrice L. Bishop have concurred in this filing. By: /s/ George A. Riley__________________ George A. Riley

ORDER PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 DATED: April __, 2010
MP1:1191444.3

The Honorable Jeremy Fogel United States District Judge

-6-

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER C06-05208-JF