Colley v. Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc. et al

Filing 100

ORDER STAYING CASE and deferring ruling on renewed motion to dismiss pending disposition of appeal. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 3/06/2019.(jpp)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

KARIM KHOJA, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated,

15
16
17

ORDER STAYING CASE AND
DEFERRING RULING ON
RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS
PENDING DISPOSITION OF
APPEAL

Plaintiff,

13
14

Case No.: 15-CV-540 JLS (KSC)

v.
OREXIGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC.,
JOSEPH P. HAGAN, MICHAEL A.
NARACHI, and PRESTON KLASSEN,

(ECF Nos. 98, 99)

Defendants.

18
19

Presently before the Court is Defendants Joseph P. Hagan, Michael A. Narachi, and

20

Preston Klassen’s (the “Moving Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Consolidated Complaint

21

for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws (“Renewed Mot.,” ECF No. 98). On January

22

23, 2019, the Court set a briefing schedule and a hearing for April 18, 2019. See ECF No.

23

97. On March 5, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recalled

24

the mandate issued on November 13, 2018, as “issued in error.” See ECF No. 99. Having

25

been divested of jurisdiction, see, e.g., Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., No. 11-CV-

26

01846-LHK, 2012 WL 1987042, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 4, 2012) (“Simply

27

put, jurisdiction follows the mandate.”) (quoting United States v. Rodgers, 101 F.3d 247,

28

251 (2d Cir. 1996)), the Court STAYS this action and DEFERS RULING ON the Moving
1
15-CV-540 JLS (KSC)

1

Defendants’ Renewed Motion pending receipt of a mandate from the Ninth Circuit in

2

Khoja v. Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., No. 16-56069 (9th Cir. Filed July 26, 2016).

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5

Dated: March 6, 2019

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
15-CV-540 JLS (KSC)