Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wiltjer v. Bigband Networks

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 11, 2008

JAMES WILTJER, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFF,
v.
BIGBAND NETWORKS, INC., AMIR BASSAN- ESKENAZI, FREDERICK A. BALL, RAN OZ, LLOYD CARNEY, DEAN GILBERT, KENNETH A. GOLDMAN, GAL ISRAELY, BRUCE I. SACHS, ROBERT J. SACHS, GEOFFREY Y. YANG, MORGAN STANLEY & CO. INCORPORATED, MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, JEFFERIES & COMPANY, INC., COWEN AND COMPANY, LLC, THINKEQUITY PARTNERS LLC AND DOES 1-25, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Charles R. Breyer Judge

STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

Above-captioned action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco, and on January 2, 2008, all defendants jointly removed this action to this Court; motion to remand it the California Superior Court; to the complaint are currently due on January 9, 2008; Israely, Bruce I. Sachs, Robert J. Sachs and Geoffrey Y. Yang filed a Motion for Administrative Case No. C 07 5101 (SBA), to consider whether this case should be related to that first-filed action, and defendants Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Partners filed a joinder in that motion on January 3, 2008; complaint until after the Court rules on plaintiff's contemplated motion to remand, or such other time as the Court orders; and

WHEREAS, by granting this extension, plaintiff does not concede, and indeed contests, that removal of this action was proper, and indeed, believes that the case should have remained in the California Superior Court where it was properly filed under § 11 of the Securities Act and further, intends to move to have the case remanded in a timely manner, and thus, in no way waives any rights to remand the matter.

WHEREAS, on December 3, 2007, plaintiff James Wiltjer filed his complaint in the

WHEREAS, plaintiff opposes defendants' removal of this action and intends to file a

WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 81(c), defendants' response(s)

WHEREAS, on January 3, 2008 defendants BigBand Networks, Inc., Amir Bassan- Eskenazi, Frederick A. Ball, Ran Oz, Lloyd Carney, Dean Gilbert, Kenneth A. Goldman, Gal Relief in the substantially similar first-filed case entitled Mohanty v. Bassan-Eskenazi, et al., Smith Incorporated, Jefferies & Company, Inc., Cowen And Company, LLC, and Thinkequity

WHEREAS, plaintiff has agreed to give all defendants an extension to respond to the

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that defendants need not respond to the complaint until after the Court rules on plaintiff's contemplated motion to remand, or such other time as the Court orders.

Dated: January 9, 2008

ATTESTATION

I, Joni Ostler, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file this STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT. In compliance with General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that Keith E. Eggleton, Michael C. Tu and Jeffrey W. Lawrence have all concurred in this filing.

IT IS ORDERED

20080111

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.