Free Case Management Statement - District Court of California - California

Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW

Document 41

Filed 06/19/2008

Page 1 of 7

1 COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP 2 DENNIS J. HERMAN (220163) DANIEL J. PFEFFERBAUM (248631) 3 100 Pine Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94111 4 Telephone: 415/288-4545 415/288-4534 (fax) 5 [email protected] [email protected] 6 Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 OAKLAND DIVISION 10 JERRY TWINDE, On Behalf of Himself and ) No. 4:07-cv-04972-CW 11 All Others Similarly Situated, ) ) CLASS ACTION 12 Plaintiff, ) ) 13 vs. ) ) 14 THRESHOLD PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., ) et al., ) 15 ) Defendants. ) 16 ) ) No. 4:07-cv-04971-CW RAYNOLD L. GILBERT, On Behalf of 17 Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, ) ) CLASS ACTION 18 ) Plaintiff, ) 19 ) vs. ) 20 THRESHOLD PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., ) ) et al., 21 ) ) Defendants. 22 ) 23 24 25 26 27 28 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT

Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW

Document 41

Filed 06/19/2008

Page 2 of 7

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-9(a), the parties to the above-entitled action submit this Joint

2 Case Management Statement for the Case Management Conference scheduled for June 19, 2008 at 3 2:00 p.m. On January 15, 2008, plaintiffs filed the Consolidated Amended Complaint ("CAC"), 4 defendants moved to dismiss on March 7, 2008. After full briefing, oral argument is set to be heard 5 on defendants motion on June 19, 2008. Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 6 ("PSLRA") discovery in this case has been stayed. 15 U.S.C. §78u-4(b)(3)(B). 7 I. 8 9 JURISDICTION AND SERVICE A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction

The claims asserted herein arise under and pursuant to §§11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the 1933 Act

10 (15 U.S.C. §§77k, 77l(a)(2) and 77o) and §§10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act (15 U.S.C. §§78j(b) and 11 78t(a)) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the SEC (17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5). This Court has 12 jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, §22 of the 1933 Act 13 and §27 of the 1934 Act. Venue is proper pursuant to §22 of the 1933 Act and §27 of the 1934 Act. 14 15 16 17 B. Service

All of the defendants named in the CAC have been served at this time. C. Additional Parties to Be Joined

There are no additional parties to be joined at this time. However, the parties reserve the

18 right to join additional parties in the future. 19 II. 20 21 DESCRIPTION OF CASE A. Principal Factual and Legal Issues in Dispute

The parties' identification of factual and legal issues in dispute is based upon the existing

22 pleadings. The parties agree that the existing pleadings raise at least the following factual and legal 23 disputes: 24 1. The issues raised by defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Amended

25 Complaint, including whether plaintiffs fail to state claims for relief and whether plaintiffs' claims, 26 or certain of them, are time-barred; 27 28
CMC4:07-cv-04972-CW

2.

Whether defendants' acts violated the federal securities laws as alleged in the CAC;

-1-

Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW

Document 41

Filed 06/19/2008

Page 3 of 7

1

3.

Whether the market price of the Company's securities during the Class Period was

2 artificially inflated due to the alleged material omissions and/or misrepresentations complained of in 3 the CAC; and 4 4. Whether the members of the Class have sustained damages, and if so, the proper

5 measure of any such damages. 6 III. 7 MOTIONS Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is currently pending before the Court. Oral argument will be

8 heard on this motion on June 19, 2008. 9 IV. 10 AMENDMENT TO PLEADINGS Plaintiffs do not currently anticipate amending the CAC unless new facts relating to events

11 during the Class Period come to light, or are ordered to do so by the Court. 12 13 V. 14 15 VI. 16 Defendants have not yet responded to the allegations in the CAC. RELATED CASES The parties are not aware of any related cases. RELIEF Plaintiffs request the following relief: upholding the CAC, or any amendment allowed by the

17 Court, declaring this action to be a proper class action, awarding damages, including interest, and 18 such other relief as the Court may deem proper. 19 Defendants request that the action be dismissed with prejudice and that judgment be entered

20 in their favor. 21 VII. 22 FACTUAL STIPULATIONS OR AGREEMENTS There are no factual stipulations or agreements between the parties at this time.

23 VIII. EVIDENCE PRESERVATION 24 Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §78u-4(b)(3), the parties are aware of, and assert that they have

25 complied with, their duties to preserve evidence. 26 27 28
CMC4:07-cv-04972-CW

-2-

Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW

Document 41

Filed 06/19/2008

Page 4 of 7

1 IX. 2

INITIAL DISCLOSURES Because this is a securities litigation governed by the PSLRA and subject to the PSLRA stay

3 of discovery, the parties are not yet required to make the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 26(a)(1). 5 X. 6 DISCOVERY AND MOTION SCHEDULE Pursuant to the PSLRA, "all discovery and other proceedings" are presently stayed. 15

7 U.S.C. §78u-4(b)(3)(B). Therefore the it is premature for the parties to set forth their positions on 8 expansion of discovery limitations, fact discovery deadlines, expert discovery deadlines or a motion 9 schedule. 10 XI. 11 CLASS ACTION INFORMATION Plaintiffs seek to have this action certified as a class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)

12 and (b)(3) on behalf of a class, consisting of all persons who purchased the Company's securities 13 during the period February 4, 2005 through July 14, 2005, inclusive, and who were damaged thereby 14 (the "Class"). Defendants believe it is premature to address the propriety of maintaining this case as 15 a class action. 16 XII. 17 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties have met and conferred and agree that discussions regarding settlement are

18 premature at least until after the Court rules on the pending motion to dismiss. 19 XIII. CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 A. Consent

The parties do not consent to assignment of the case to a magistrate judge. B. Other References

The parties agree that this case is not suitable for reference to binding arbitration or the

24 Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. 25 26 case. 27 28
CMC4:07-cv-04972-CW

The parties further agree that evaluation of a special master is premature at this stage of the

-3-

Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW

Document 41

Filed 06/19/2008

Page 5 of 7

1 XIV. TRIAL SCHEDULE 2 3 A. Trial Date

The parties agree that, given the current procedural posture of the case, determining a trial

4 date is premature. 5 6 B. Length of Trial

The parties agree that, given the current procedural posture of the case, estimating the length

7 of trial is premature. 8 DATED: June 19, 2008 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 16 17 DATED: June 19, 2008 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
CMC4:07-cv-04972-CW
T:\CasesSF\Threshold\CMC00052115.doc

COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP DENNIS J. HERMAN DANIEL J. PFEFFERBAUM

/s/ DENNIS J. HERMAN 100 Pine Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415/288-4545 415/288-4534 (fax)

HELLER EHRMAN LLP MICHAEL L. CHARLSON LAURENCE A. WEISS ALEXANDER M.R. LYON

/s/ MICHAEL L. CHARLSON 275 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, CA 94025-3506 Telephone: 650/324-7000 650/324-0638 (fax) Counsel for Defendants

-4-

Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW

Document 41

Filed 06/19/2008

Page 6 of 7

1 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on June 19, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of

3 the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the e-mail 4 addresses denoted on the attached Electronic Mail Notice List, and I hereby certify that I have 5 mailed the foregoing document or paper via the United States Postal Service to the non-CM/ECF 6 participants indicated on the attached Manual Notice List. 7 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the

8 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June 19, 2008. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 E-mail: [email protected] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
CMC4:07-cv-04972-CW

s/ Dennis J. Herman DENNIS J. HERMAN COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP 100 Pine Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415/288-4545 415/288-4534 (fax)

CAND-ECF Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW Document 41 Filed 06/19/2008 Page 7 of 7

Page 1 of 1

Mailing Information for a Case 4:07-cv-04972-CW
Electronic Mail Notice List
The following are those who are currently on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case. Kevin Anthony Burke [email protected] Michael L. Charlson [email protected],[email protected],[email protected] Marc S. Henzel [email protected] Dennis J. Herman [email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected] Alexander M.R. Lyon [email protected],[email protected] Daniel Jacob Pfefferbaum [email protected] Darren Jay Robbins [email protected] Samuel H. Rudman [email protected] Evan J. Smith [email protected] Laurence Andrew Weiss [email protected]

Manual Notice List
The following is the list of attorneys who are not on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case (who therefore require manual noticing). You may wish to use your mouse to select and copy this list into your word processing program in order to create notices or labels for these recipients.
Mary K. Blasy Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 655 West Broadway Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101

https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/MailList.pl?857816511029092-L_470_0-1

6/19/2008