Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Curtis and Charlotte Westley, Individually and On Behalf of Others Similarly Situated v. Oclaro

April 19, 2012

CURTIS AND CHARLOTTE WESTLEY, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
OCLARO, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Edward M. Chen United States District Court Judge

and related consolidated action

IN RE OCLARO, INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION,

(Derivative Action)

This Document Relates to: WESTLEY v. OCLARO

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SCHEDULING PLAINTIFFS' FILING OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE THERETO AND RESCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Curtis and Charlotte Westley (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), through their counsel, filed a purported class action complaint ("Complaint") against Defendants Oclaro, Inc., 3 Alain Couder, Jerry Turin, and James Haynes (collectively, "Defendants") in the above-entitled 4 matter on May 19, 2011;

5 WHEREAS, on July 18, 2011, the Connecticut Laborers' Pension Fund (the "Fund") moved 6 the Court for an order appointing the Fund as Lead Plaintiff and approving its selection of counsel as 7 Lead Counsel;

8 WHEREAS, on September 12, 2011, the Court entered an order granting the Fund's motion 9 and appointing it as Lead Plaintiff;

WHEREAS, on October 27, 2011, Lead Plaintiff filed an amended complaint for violation of 11 the federal securities laws ("Amended Complaint") against Defendants Oclaro, Inc., Alain Couder, 12 and Jerry Turin;

WHEREAS, the Amended Complaint asserts claims under the federal securities laws that are 14 subject to the procedural requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 15 ("Reform Act"), including those set forth in 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4;

WHEREAS, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint on December 12, 17 2011, triggering a stay of discovery under the Reform Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(3)(B);

WHEREAS, on March 2, 2012, the Clerk issued notice that the Case Management 19 Conference, previously scheduled for March 23, 2012, was reset for April 27, 2012 and the Case 20 Management Statement was due April 20, 2012; 21

WHEREAS, the Court held a hearing on March 23, 2012 on the motion to dismiss the 22 Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, on March 27, 2012, the Court entered an order granting Defendants' motion to 24 dismiss the Amended Complaint without prejudice and allowing Plaintiffs thirty (30) days to file an 25 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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