Wolfe v. AspenBio Pharma Inc. et al.

Filing 34

SECOND ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 8/25/2011. (sah, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00165-REB-KMT
JOHN WOLFE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
MIKE MARNHOUT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
SHAZI IQBAL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ASPENBIO PHARMA, INC., a Colorado corporation,
RICHARD G. DONNELLY,
GREGORY PUSEY,
JEFFREY G. McGONEGAL,
MARK COLGIN, and
ROBERT CASPARI,
Defendants.
SECOND ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION1
Blackburn, J.
The matter is again before the court sua sponte. In this putative class action, the
court recognizes the requirement under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(1)(A) to determine whether
to certify a class before the case properly can proceed to resolution by summary
judgment, trial, or otherwise. Therefore, I establish the following briefing schedule to
govern resolution of this and related matters.
IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That no later than thirty (30) days after the first answer or other response,
e.g., motion to dismiss, etc., to the complaint is filed by the defendant in this case, the

1

An Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations of The Securities Laws [#29] was filed
on August 23, 2011, thus, prompting this Second Order Re: Motions For Class Certification.

plaintiff SHALL FILE a motion for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 (a) that
addresses, inter alia, (i) the prerequisites at Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1)-(4), and (ii) the
matters at Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b); (b) that defines the proposed class; and (c) that
requests the appointment of class counsel;
2. That the deadlines for filing response and reply briefs SHALL BE AS
PRESCRIBED under D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1C.;
3. That an applicant for class counsel SHALL ADDRESS the matters at Fed. R.
Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(A)(i)-(iv) and any other matter pertinent to the applicant’s ability to fairly
and adequately represent the interests of the proposed class; and
4. That based on the parties’ submissions, the court WILL either rule on the
papers, order further briefing, convene an evidentiary hearing, or take such further
action as the court in its discretion deems proper and necessary.
Dated August 25, 2011, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2