From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Copeland v. Lane

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
Nov 15, 2011
CASE NO.: CV-11-01058-EJD (N.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO.: CV-11-01058-EJD

11-15-2011

A.J. COPELAND, Plaintiff, v. RAYMOND J. LANE, GARY REINER, LEO APOTHEKER, MEG WHITMAN, SHUMEET BANERJI, PATRICIA RUSSO, DOMINIQUE SENEQUIER, G. KENNEDY THOMPSON, MARK v. HURD, MARC L. ANDREESSEN, SARI M. BALDAUF, RAJIV L. GUPTA, LAWRENCE T. BABBIO, JR., JOHN H. HAMMERGREN, JOEL Z. HYATT, JOHN R. JOYCE, LUCILLE S. SALHANY, and ROBERT L. RYAN, Defendants, v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Nominal Defendant.

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation STEVEN M. SCHATZ BORIS FELDMAN MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP MARC J. SONNENFELD Attorneys for Nominal Defendant Hewlett-Packard Company GREENFIELD & GOODMAN, LLC RICHARD. D. GREENFIELD By: Richard D. Greenfield (Admitted pro hac vice ) SHEPHERDFINKELMANMILLER & SHAHLLP SCOTT R. SHEPHERD LESLEYELIZABETHWEAVER Attorneys for Plaintiff A. J. Copeland SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOMLLP GARRETT J. WALTZER Attorneys for Defendants Marc L. Andreessen, Lawrence T. Babbio, Sari M. Baldauf, Rajiv L. Gupta, John H. Hammergren, Joel Z. Hyatt, John R Joyce, Robert L. Ryan, Lucille S. Salhany, and G. Kennedy Thompson GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP JONATHAN C. DICKEY REBECCA J. LAZARUS By: Jonathan Dickey Attorneys for Defendants Raymond J. Lane, Gary Reiner, Leo Apotheker, Meg Whitman, Shumeet Banerji, Patricia Russo, and Dominique Senequier ALLENMATKINS LECKGAMBLEMALLORY & NATSIS LLP LAWRENCE D. LEWIS By: Lawrence D. Lewis Attorneys for Defendant Mark V. Hurd


STEVEN M. SCHATZ, State Bar No. 118356

sschatz@wsgr.com

BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838

boris.feldman@wsgr.com

KATHERINE L. HENDERSON, State Bar No. 242676

khenderson@wsgr.com

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Professional Corporation

650 Page Mill Road

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050

Telephone: (650) 493-9300

Facsimile: (650) 565-5100

MARC J. SONNENFELD (Pro Hac Vice)

msonnenfeld@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

1701 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921

Telephone: (215) 963-5000

Facsimile: (215) 963-5001

Attorneys for Nominal Defendant

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE


Before: Hon. Edward J. Davila

Plaintiff A. J. Copeland ("Plaintiff"), nominal defendant Hewlett-Packard Company ("HP" or the "Company"), and defendants Raymond J. Lane, Gary Reiner, Leo Apotheker, Meg Whitman, Shumeet Banerji, Patricia Russo, Dominique Senequier, G. Kennedy Thompson, Mark V. Hurd, Marc L. Andreessen, Sari M. Baldauf, Rajiv L. Gupta, Lawrence T. Babbio, John H. Hammergren, Joel Z. Hyatt, John R. Joyce, Lucille S. Salhany, and Robert L. Ryan (the "Individual Defendants") stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, on August 23, 2010 and August 28, 2010, Plaintiff demanded that HP institute litigation against certain of its current and former officers and directors;

WHEREAS, on March 7, 2011, Plaintiff filed a complaint in this action (the "Complaint");

WHEREAS, on April 6, 2011, HP filed a Motion To Dismiss Complaint As Premature Pursuant To Rule 23.1 (Docket 10) which Motion currently is set to be heard on December 2, 2011;

WHEREAS, the Committee denominated as the Independent Committee of HP's Board of Directors completed its investigation of the allegations made by Plaintiff in his Complaint and litigation demands, and provided its final report to HP's Board (the "Report");

WHEREAS, on July 18, 2010, HP informed Plaintiff that based on the Independent Committee's investigation and recommendation and after careful consideration, HP's Board determined that it is not in the Company's best interest to pursue the claims asserted in Plaintiff's litigation demands and, therefore, the Company will not pursue any of the claims against any of the individuals listed in the demands;

WHEREAS, on August 16, 2011, HP provided the Report to Plaintiff pursuant to a confidentiality agreement;

WHEREAS, on August 17, 2011, the Court directed the parties to clarify whether the Motion to Dismiss will proceed on December 2, 2011 in a brief joint statement filed on or before November 10, 2011 (Docket 48); and

WHEREAS, Plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint;

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1. The hearing on Nominal Defendant Hewlett-Packard Company's Motion To Dismiss Complaint As Premature Pursuant To Rule 23.1, currently set for December 2, 2011, shall not proceed.
2. Plaintiff shall have up to and including December 2, 2011 to file an Amended Complaint.
3. HP shall have up to and including February 8, 2012 to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint.
4. The Individual Defendants need not answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint prior to February 8, 2012; Plaintiff and the Individual Defendants shall cooperate in good faith to negotiate a response date and briefing schedule for responding to the Amended Complaint.
5. This stipulation is without prejudice to any party seeking additional relief via stipulation or court order.
6. In executing this stipulation, the Individual Defendants preserve their rights to object to this action for improper venue and/or lack of personal jurisdiction.

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Professional Corporation

STEVEN M. SCHATZ

BORIS FELDMAN

By: Steven M. Schatz

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

MARC J. SONNENFELD

Attorneys for Nominal Defendant

Hewlett-Packard Company

GREENFIELD & GOODMAN, LLC

RICHARD. D. GREENFIELD

By: Richard D. Greenfield

(Admitted pro hac vice)

SHEPHERDFINKELMANMILLER

& SHAHLLP

SCOTT R. SHEPHERD

LESLEYELIZABETHWEAVER

Attorneys for Plaintiff A. J. Copeland

SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER

& FLOMLLP

GARRETT J. WALTZER

By: Garrett J. Waltzer

Attorneys for Defendants Marc L. Andreessen,

Lawrence T. Babbio, Sari M. Baldauf, Rajiv L.

Gupta, John H. Hammergren, Joel Z. Hyatt, John R

Joyce, Robert L. Ryan, Lucille S. Salhany, and G.

Kennedy Thompson

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

JONATHAN C. DICKEY

REBECCA J. LAZARUS

By: Jonathan Dickey

Attorneys for Defendants Raymond J. Lane, Gary

Reiner, Leo Apotheker, Meg Whitman, Shumeet

Banerji, Patricia Russo, and Dominique Senequier

ALLENMATKINS LECKGAMBLEMALLORY

& NATSIS LLP

LAWRENCE D. LEWIS

By: Lawrence D. Lewis

Attorneys for Defendant Mark V. Hurd

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION. IT IS SO ORDERED AS MODIFIED: The Clerk shall terminate Docket Item No. 10. The Motion to Consolidate (Docket Item No. 39) and Case Management Conference remain on calendar for December 2, 2011.

HON. EDWARD J. DAVILA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45

I, Brian Danitz, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to file the STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CASE SCHEDULE. In compliance with General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that each of the signatories above has concurred in this filing.

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI

Professional Corporation

By: Brian Danitz

Counsel for Nominal Defendant

Hewlett-Packard Company


Summaries of

Copeland v. Lane

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
Nov 15, 2011
CASE NO.: CV-11-01058-EJD (N.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2011)
Case details for

Copeland v. Lane

Case Details

Full title:A.J. COPELAND, Plaintiff, v. RAYMOND J. LANE, GARY REINER, LEO APOTHEKER…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Date published: Nov 15, 2011

Citations

CASE NO.: CV-11-01058-EJD (N.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2011)