Opinion
Civil Action No. 07-cv-02351-PAB-KLM.
March 24, 2010
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on defendant Deloitte Touche LLP's request for judicial notice [Docket No. 105] and defendant Crocs, Inc. and various individual defendants' request for judicial notice [Docket No. 109]. Both ask the Court to take judicial notice of certain SEC filings, press releases, industry publications, and conference call transcripts in connection with the defendants' respective motions to dismiss [Docket Nos. 104, 107, 108].
In their response to the request for judicial notice, plaintiffs do not object to the Court's taking of judicial notice of the documents' existence, but "do object to the extent that [d]efendants seek judicial notice of the SEC filings, press releases, and conference call transcripts to prove the truth of the matters asserted therein." [Docket No. 113 at 2].
Plaintiffs also object to any reliance on a 10b5-1 plan which Crocs, Inc. references in its motion to dismiss [Docket No. 107 at 20]. However, because this plan is not referenced in the defendants' motions presently before the Court, I make no ruling on the issue at this time.
Being fully advised of the premises, it is ORDERED that defendant Deloitte Touche LLP's request for judicial notice [Docket No. 105] and defendant Crocs, Inc. and various individual defendants' request for judicial notice [Docket No. 109] are GRANTED as follows:
The Court will take judicial notice of the existence of the two documents (listed in paragraphs 1-2) referenced in defendant Deloitte Touche LLP's request for judicial notice [Docket No. 105 at 2] and the fourteen documents (listed in paragraphs A-N) referenced in defendant Crocs, Inc.'s request for judicial notice [Docket No. 109 at 2-4]. Furthermore, the Court will accept that the submitted versions accurately represent the contents of those documents. However, the Court will not necessarily presume that the statements in those documents are true.