UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 28, 2012
MICHAEL TOTH, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,
ENVIVIO, INC., ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Claudia Wilken United States District Judge
CLASS ACTION JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES AND DEFERRING RESPONSES TO COMPLAINTS PENDING MOTION PRACTICE IN CONNECTION WITH REMOVAL AND REMAND
DATE ACTION FILED: 10/19/12 (Removed 11/02/12) (the "Toth Complaint") in the San Mateo Superior Court on October 19, 2012; 4 2012; federal court, with the Toth action assigned to this Court and the Wiley action assigned to the
WHEREAS, plaintiffs have indicated that they contest the validity of removal jurisdiction and that they intend to move for remand (which defendants intend to oppose); and purpose of the motion to remand and that a schedule should be set for the filing of a consolidated 14 complaint and defendants' responses following either a denial of the motion to remand or a remand 15 to state court;
Litigation, Fourth §§11.12, 11.21 and 31 (2004), the parties stipulate, and the Court hereby orders, as 19 follows: 20 in, or transferred to, this District shall be consolidated into this action for pretrial purposes.
Order shall apply to every such related action, absent order of the
Court. A party that objects to such 24 consolidation, or to any other
provision of this Order, must file an application for relief from this
Order within 30 days after the date on which a copy of the Order is
mailed to the party's counsel, 26 pursuant to Paragraph 6, infra.
severance of any claim or action, for good cause shown.
JOINT STIP & [PROPOSED] ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES & DEFERRING RESPS TO CPLTS PENDING MOTION PRACTICE IN CONNECTION W/REMOVAL AND REMAND - C 12-5636 (CW) - 1 -
WHEREAS, this action is a putative class action for violations of §§11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 that was initiated by Michael Toth ("Toth") upon the filing of a Complaint 3
WHEREAS, Joe M. Wiley ("Wiley") filed a Complaint for Violation of §§11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Wiley Complaint") in the San Mateo Superior Court on October 5, 6
WHEREAS, on November 2, 2012, defendants removed the Toth and Wiley actions to Honorable Charles R. Breyer, Case No. C 12-5637 (CRB); 10
WHEREAS, the parties believe that the cases should be related and consolidated for the NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and pursuant to Rule 16(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Civil Local Rules 7-12 and 23-1(b), and Manual for Complex 18
CONSOLIDATION OF RELATED CASES
1. The Wiley and Toth actions are related. All related actions that are subsequently filed
2. This Order is entered without prejudice to the rights of any party to apply for for this action.
3. The docket in Civil Action No. C 12-5636 (CW) shall constitute the Master Docket 4. Every pleading filed in the consolidated action shall bear the following caption:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
In re ENVIVIO, INC. SECURITIES ) Master File No. C 12-5636 (CW) 7 LITIGATION )) 8 9This Document Relates to: )) 10 ) CLASS ACTION
action in the consolidated action. When the document being filed pertains to all actions, the phrase 14
"All Actions" shall appear immediately after the phrase "This Document Relates To:." When a 15 pleading applies only to some, not all, of the actions, the document shall list, immediately after the 16 phrase "This Document Relates To:," the docket number for each individual action to which the 17 document applies, along with the last name of the first-listed plaintiff in said action. 18
6. The parties shall file an Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Cases Should Be Related pursuant to Civil L.R. 3-12 whenever a case that should be consolidated into this action is 20 filed in, or transferred to, this District. If the Court determines that the case is related, the clerk shall: 21
5. The file in Civil Action No. C 12-5636 (CW) shall constitute a Master File for every
(a) place a copy of this Order in the separate file for such action;
(b) serve on plaintiff's counsel in the new case a copy of this Order;
(c) direct that this Order be served upon defendants in the new case; and
(d) make the appropriate entry in the Master Docket.
7. Any counsel of record for a party in this action who is not a member of the Bar of this
26District is hereby admitted to practice pro hac vice in this action. 27 28
8. Counsel for the parties shall notify their clients of their document preservation
2 obligations pursuant to the federal securities laws and the Local Rules. 3
PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS
9. Defendants are not required to respond to the existing complaints until after the 5 remand motion is decided and plaintiff files an amended complaint in whichever court this action 6 resides following the motion. 7
10. Defendants are not required to respond to the complaint in any action consolidated 8 into this action, other than a consolidated complaint or a complaint. 9
11. Plaintiff shall file a consolidated complaint within 60 days after the motion to remand
10 is decided. The consolidated complaint shall be the operative complaint and shall supersede all 11 complaints filed in any of the actions consolidated herein. 12
12. Defendants shall respond to the consolidated complaint within 60 days after service.
If defendants file any motions directed at the consolidated complaint, the opposition and reply briefs 14 shall be filed within 60 days and 30 days, respectively, of that response. 15
DATED: November 26, 2012 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP CHRISTOPHER P. SEEFER 17 18 s/ Christopher P. Seefer CHRISTOPHER P. SEEFER 19 Post Montgomery Center 20 One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94104 21 Telephone: 415/288-4545 415/288-4534 (fax) 22 Attorneys for Plaintiff Joe M. Wiley 23DATED: November 26, 2012 GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 24 LIONEL Z. GLANCY MICHAEL GOLDBERG 25 ROBERT V. PRONGAY CASEY E. SADLER 26 27 s/ Lionel Z. Glancy 28 LIONEL Z. GLANCY 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 201-9150 (310) 201-9160 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiff Michael Toth 5DATED: November 26, 2012 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP DAVID M. FURBUSH JAMES M. LINDFELT s/ David M. Furbush DAVID M. FURBUSH 2550 Hanover Street Palo Alto, CA 94304-1115 Telephone: 650/233-4500 650/233-4545 (fax) Attorneys for Defendants Envivio, Inc., Julien Signes, Erik E. Miller, Gianluca U. Rattazzi, Kevin E. Dillon, Corentin du Roy de Blicquy, R. David Spreng, Clifford B. Meltzer, Marcel Gani, Terry D. Kramer and Edward A. Gilhuly DATED: November 26, 2012 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP NORMAN J. BLEARS s/ Norman J. Blears NORMAN J. BLEARS 525 University Avenue, 4th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Telephone: 650/463-4000 650/463-4199 (fax) HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP ROBIN WECHKINS 8426 316th Place, S.E. Issaquah, WA 98027 Telephone: 650/463-4000 650/463-4199 (fax) Attorneys for Defendants Goldman, Sachs & Co., Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated and William Blair & Company, L.L.C.
I, Christopher P. Seefer, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] CONSOLIDATED ORDER. In compliance with Civil Local 3
Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that David M. Furbush and Norman J. Blears have concurred in this 4 filing. 5
s/ Christopher P. Seefer CHRISTOPHER P. SEEFER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.