From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Bare Escentuals, Inc. Securities Litigation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, Oakland Division
Apr 15, 2010
C-09-03268-PJH (N.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2010)

Opinion

          JEROME F. BIRN, JR., State Bar No. 128561, jbirn@wsgr.com, KEITH E. EGGLETON, State Bar No. 159842, keggleton@wsgr.com, KELLEY M. KINNEY, State Bar No. 216823, kkinney@wsgr.com. WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation, Palo Alto, CA. Attorneys for Defendants BARE ESCENTUALS, INC., LESLIE A. BLODGETT, MYLES B. McCORMICK, ROSS M. JONES, BRADLEY M. BLOOM, JOHN C. HANSEN, MICHAEL J. JOHN, LEA ANNE OTTINGER, KAREN M. ROSE, GLEN T. SENK, and DIANE M. MILES.

          HOGAN & HARTSON LLP, Palo Alto, CA,, Norman J. Blears, Attorneys for Defendants Goldman, Sachs Group, Inc., CIBC World, Markets, Banc of America, Securities LLC, Piper Jaffray, Companies, Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC, and SunTrust Robinson, Humphrey, Inc., f/k/a SunTrust, Capital Markets, Inc.

          SCOTT + SCOTT LLP, San Diego, CA, Mary K. Blasy, Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs.


          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING THE HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS

          PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge.

         WHEREAS, on November 12, 2009, this Court entered an order on the parties' stipulated briefing schedule for motions to dismiss. Under the scheduling order, defendants' motions to dismiss were due February 26, 2010, lead plaintiffs' opposition to defendants' motions to dismiss are due April 23, 2010, and defendants' replies in support of their motions to dismiss are due May 28, 2010. The Court set a hearing date of June 30, 2010 on defendants' motions to dismiss;

         WHEREAS, counsel for defendants Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., CIBC World Markets, Banc of America Securities LLC, Piper Jaffray Companies, Thomas Weisel Partners LLC, and SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc., f/k/a SunTrust Capital Markets, Inc. will be out of the country on June 30, 2010;

         WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred regarding the hearing date on defendants' motions to dismiss pursuant to this Court's order, and have agreed to extend the hearing date on defendants' motions to dismiss until July 14, 2010;

         WHEREAS, in light of the proposed new hearing date, the parties have agreed, subject to Court order, to extend the deadlines for lead plaintiffs' opposition to defendants' motions to dismiss and defendants' replies in support of their motions to dismiss by one week each;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby agree and stipulate, and the Court hereby orders, as follows:

         1. Lead plaintiffs shall file any oppositions to defendants' motions to dismiss by April 30, 2010;

         2. Defendants shall file their replies in support of their motions to dismiss by June 4, 2010; and

         3. The Court will hear oral argument on defendants' motions to dismiss on July 14, 2010 at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard.

         The parties respectfully request that the Court enter an order approving this stipulation.

         ORDER

         PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

         ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45

         I, Kelley M. Kinney, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatories, Norman J. Blears and Mary J. Blasy. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 13th day of April, 2010 at Palo Alto, California.


Summaries of

In re Bare Escentuals, Inc. Securities Litigation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, Oakland Division
Apr 15, 2010
C-09-03268-PJH (N.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2010)
Case details for

In re Bare Escentuals, Inc. Securities Litigation

Case Details

Full title:In re BARE ESCENTUALS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION. This Document Relates…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, Oakland Division

Date published: Apr 15, 2010

Citations

C-09-03268-PJH (N.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2010)