Washtenaw County Employees Retirement System v. Celera Corporation et al

Filing 80

Order Granting 78 Stipulation to Extend Deadline to Amend Defendants' Answer. Answer due 1/7/2013.(ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/17/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

JORDAN ETH (CA SBN 121617)
[e-mail]
JUDSON E. LOBDELL (CA SBN 146041)
[e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.268.7522
Attorneys for Defendants
Celera Corporation, Kathy Ordoñez, Joel R. Jung,
Ugo DeBlasi, and Christopher Hall

8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN JOSE DIVISION

12
13

In re CELERA CORP. SEC. LITIG.

14
15
16

Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
CLASS ACTION

This Document Relates To:
ALL ACTIONS.

XXXXXXXX
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO
AMEND DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO AMEND DEFS’ ANSWER
XXXXXX
Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
sf-3223839

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, the parties, Lead Plaintiff Washtenaw County

2

Employees’ Retirement System (“Lead Plaintiff”) and defendants Celera Corporation, Kathy

3

Ordoñez, Joel R. Jung, Ugo DeBlasi and Christopher Hall (collectively, “Defendants”), by and

4

through their undersigned counsel of record, submit the following stipulation and proposed order:

5

WHEREAS, on May 6, 2011, Lead Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Consolidated

6
7
8
9
10

Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws (the “Complaint”) (Dkt. No. 45);
WHEREAS, on September 4, 2012, the Court denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss the
Complaint (Dkt. No. 65);
WHEREAS, by Order dated September 14, 2012 (Dkt. No. 67), the Court extended
Defendants’ deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint until October 19, 2012;

11

WHEREAS, on October 19, 2012, Defendants filed their Answer to the Complaint;

12

WHEREAS, by Order dated November 7, 2012 (Dkt. No. 77), the Court extended the

13

deadline for Lead Plaintiff to file a Motion to Strike Defendants’ Answer, or portions thereof,

14

until November 29, 2012;

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants have met and conferred with respect to the
sufficiency of Defendants’ Answer;
WHEREAS, Defendants have agreed to amend their Answer and represent that they need
additional time to amend Defendants’ Answer, or portions thereof;
WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiff agrees to provide written consent to Defendants to amend their
Answer without leave of Court until January 7, 2013;
WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiff agrees not to file a Motion to Strike prior to the filing by
Defendants of an amended Answer on or before January 7, 2013;

23

WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants agree to confer, upon the filing of an

24

amended Answer, as to a reasonable time period for Lead Plaintiff to move to strike the amended

25

Answer should Lead Plaintiff seek to do so;

26

WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants agree that in the event that Defendants move

27

for summary judgment on the basis of the affirmative defenses asserted in the amended Answer,

28
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO AMEND DEFS’ ANSWER
XXXXXX
Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
sf-3223839

1

1

Lead Plaintiff and Defendants shall confer as to a reasonable time period for Lead Plaintiff to

2

oppose such motion;

3

WHEREAS, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2(a)(2), the following are previous time

4

modifications in this action: (i) July 8, 2010 Order (J. Ware) extending Defendants’ time to

5

respond to the Complaint until after the appointment of Lead Plaintiff (Dkt. No. 7); (ii)

6

November 2, 2010 Order (J. Ware) continuing the case management conference from

7

November 15, 2010 to March 7, 2011 (Dkt. No. 27); (iii) February 18, 2011 Clerk’s Notice

8

continuing the hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss and the case management conference

9

from March 7, 2011 until March 28, 2011 (Dkt. No. 36); (iv) March 24, 2011 Order (J. Ware)

10

vacating the hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss and continuing the case management

11

conference, and also setting a schedule for the filing of, briefing of, and hearing on Lead

12

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Consolidated Complaint (Dkt. No. 40); (v) June 16, 2011 Order (J.

13

Davila) setting a schedule for the filing of, briefing of, and hearing on Lead Plaintiff’s Second

14

Amended Consolidated Complaint (Dkt. No. 47); (vi) November 23, 2011 Order (J. Davila)

15

continuing the case management conference scheduled for December 2, 2011 (Dkt. No. 61); (vii)

16

September 14, 2012 Order (J. Davila) extending time for Defendants to answer or otherwise

17

respond to the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint (Dkt. No. 67); (viii) October 5, 2012

18

Order (J. Davila) extending time for the Rule 26(f) Conference and for parties to file their Joint

19

Case Management Statement and the Case Management Conference to November 9, 2012 (Dkt.

20

No. 71); and (ix) November 7, 2012 Order (J. Davila) extending the deadline for Lead Plaintiff to

21

file a Motion to Strike Defendants’ Answer, or portions thereof, to November 29, 2012 (Dkt. No.

22

77); and

23
24

WHEREAS, the continuance of the deadline for Defendants to amend their Answer will
not affect any other deadlines or events in this action except as otherwise set forth above.

25

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED among the undersigned parties that the

26

deadline for Defendants to amend their Answer without leave of Court shall be continued until

27

January 7, 2013, or such later date as is convenient for the Court.

28
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO AMEND DEFS’ ANSWER
XXXXXX
Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
sf-3223839

2

1

Dated: December 14, 2012

2

JORDAN ETH
JUDSON E. LOBDELL
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

3
4

By:

5

Attorneys for Defendants
CELERA CORPORATION, KATHY
ORDOÑEZ, JOEL R. JUNG, UGO
DeBLASI, AND CHRISTOPHER
HALL

6
7
8
9
10

/s/Judson E. Lobdell
JUDSON E. LOBDELL

Dated: December 14, 2012

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN
& DOWD LLP
WILLOW E. RADCLIFFE
SUNNY S. SARKIS

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

By:

/s/ Willow E. Radcliffe
WILLOW E. RADCLIFFE

Post Montgomery Center
One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
415/288-4534 (fax)
Lead Counsel for Plaintiff

18
19
20
21
22
23

VANOVERBEKE MICHAUD &
TIMMONY, P.C.
MICHAEL J. VANOVERBEKE
THOMAS C. MICHAUD
79 Alfred Street
Detroit, MI 48201
Telephone: [phone]
313/578-1201 (fax)

24
25
26
27
28
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO AMEND DEFS’ ANSWER
XXXXXX
Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
sf-3223839

3

1
2
3
4

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP
LIONEL Z. GLANCY
ROBERT V. PRONGAY
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
310/201-9160 (fax)

5
6

Additional Counsel for Plaintiff

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO AMEND DEFS’ ANSWER
XXXXXX
Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
sf-3223839

4

1
2

I, Judson E. Lobdell, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this

3

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Extend Deadline to Amend Defendants’ Answer. In

4

compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that Willow E. Radcliffe has

5

concurred in this filing.

6
7

s/ Judson E. Lobdell
JUDSON E. LOBDELL

8
9
***
10
11
12
13
14

ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
12/17/2012
DATED: _____________________
_

_
______________________________________
THE HONORABLE EDWARD J. DAVILA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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

STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO AMEND DEFS’ ANSWER
Case No. 10-cv-02604-EJD(HRL)
sf-3223839