From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wolfe v. Aspenbio Pharma, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Aug 25, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00165-REB-KMT (D. Colo. Aug. 25, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00165-REB-KMT

08-25-2011

JOHN WOLFE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, MIKE MARNHOUT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, SHAZI IQBAL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. ASPENBIO PHARMA, INC., a Colorado corporation, RICHARD G. DONNELLY, GREGORY PUSEY, JEFFREY G. McGONEGAL, MARK COLGIN, and ROBERT CASPARI, Defendants.


Judge Robert E. Blackburn

SECOND ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

An Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations of The Securities Laws [#29] was filed on August 23, 2011, thus, prompting this Second Order Re: Motions For Class Certification.

Blackburn, J.

The matter is again before the court sua sponte. In this putative class action, the court recognizes the requirement under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(1)(A) to determine whether to certify a class before the case properly can proceed to resolution by summary judgment, trial, or otherwise. Therefore, I establish the following briefing schedule to govern resolution of this and related matters.

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That no later than thirty (30) days after the first answer or other response, e.g., motion to dismiss, etc., to the complaint is filed by the defendant in this case, the plaintiff SHALL FILE a motion for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 (a) that addresses, inter alia, (i) the prerequisites at Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1)-(4), and (ii) the matters at Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b); (b) that defines the proposed class; and (c) that requests the appointment of class counsel;

2. That the deadlines for filing response and reply briefs SHALL BE AS PRESCRIBED under D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1C.;

3. That an applicant for class counsel SHALL ADDRESS the matters at Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1)(A)(i)-(iv) and any other matter pertinent to the applicant's ability to fairly and adequately represent the interests of the proposed class; and

4. That based on the parties' submissions, the court WILL either rule on the papers, order further briefing, convene an evidentiary hearing, or take such further action as the court in its discretion deems proper and necessary.

Dated August 25, 2011, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

Robert E. Blackburn

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Wolfe v. Aspenbio Pharma, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Aug 25, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00165-REB-KMT (D. Colo. Aug. 25, 2011)
Case details for

Wolfe v. Aspenbio Pharma, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN WOLFE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Aug 25, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-00165-REB-KMT (D. Colo. Aug. 25, 2011)