Johnson v. Wireless Facilities, Inc.

Full title: BRETT JOHNSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, S.D. California

Date published: May 21, 2007

07CV0482-BTM (NLS), 07CV0616-BTM (NLS), 07CV0626-BTM (NLS) (S.D. Cal. May. 21, 2007)

Opinion

BRETT JOHNSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. WIRELESS FACILITIES, INC., ERIC M. DEMARCO, SCOTT ANDERSON, BANDEL CARANO, WILLIAM HOGLUND, SCOT JARVIS, LAURA L. SIEGAL, CAROL A. CLAY, ANDREW LEITCH, MASOOD K. TAYEBI, DEANNA LUND, DAN STOKELY, WILLIAM OWENS, DAVE GARRISON, TERRY ASHWILL, DAVID LEE, THOMAS MUNRO AND MASSIH TAYEBI Defendants. LABORERS LOCAL 190 PENSION FUND, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. WIRELESS FACILITIES, INC., et al. Defendants. BRUCE REAMER, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. WIRELESS FACILITIES, INC., et al. Defendants. Nos. 07CV0482-BTM (NLS), 07CV0616-BTM (NLS), 07CV0626-BTM (NLS) United States District Court, S.D. California. May 21, 2007

          CLASS ACTION [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION CONSOLIDATING RELATED ACTIONS; EXTENDING DEFENDANTS' TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; DOCUMENT PRESERVATION

          BARRY T. MOSKOWITZ, District Judge.

         Pursuant to the Joint Motion Consolidating Related Actions; Extending Defendants' Time to Respond to Complaint; Document Preservation, and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that:

         1. These actions and all subsequently-filed related actions, other than derivative lawsuits, are hereby consolidated under Master File No. 07CV0482-BTM (NLS), which shall be captioned In re Wireless Facilities, Inc. Securities Litigation II .

         2. Defendants shall file a notice of consolidation in subsequently-filed related actions that are not derivative lawsuits. Any party may challenge consolidation of subsequently-filed actions by filing an objection within ten days of the filing of the notice of consolidation.

         3. Defendants need not respond to any of the complaints filed in this action prior to the filing of the consolidated Complaint.

         4. Once lead plaintiff has filed and served the consolidated Complaint, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in order to set a reasonable time for which Defendants will have to respond to the Complaint.

         5. Once the parties have agreed upon a reasonable time to respond to the Complaint, the parties shall submit to the Court a stipulation and proposed order setting forth the agreed upon response date as well as a briefing schedule for any motion Defendants may file directed at the Complaint.

         6. All parties hereto shall give notice to their clients of their obligations regarding document preservation under the federal securities laws.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.