Free Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00705-CFD

Document 86

Filed 01/30/2004

Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT : In re: PE Corporation Securities Litigation : : ____________________________________: January 30, 2004 Master File No. 3:00CV705(CFD)

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF PAGE LIMIT Lead Plaintiffs David Berlin and Vinh Vuong ("Lead Plaintiffs"), through their undersigned counsel, hereby move for a 25-page extension of Local Rule 7(d)'s page limit for reply briefs. In support of this motion, Lead Plaintiffs represent: 1. Lead Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification on July 18, 2003. The

memorandum in support of that motion, which was only 17 pages in length, did not exhaust Local Rule 7(a)'s 40 page allowance for such memoranda. Indeed, if plaintiffs' request is granted, the extra pages requested will only exceed Local Rule 7's combined opening and reply brief totals by only 2 pages. 2. Defendants obtained deposition testimony from Lead Plaintiffs Vinh Vuong and David

Berlin on November 5, 2003 and November 11, 2003, respectively, concerning Lead Plaintiffs' qualifications to serve as class representatives. 3. Thereafter, Defendants filed their Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs'

Motion for Class Certification on December 29, 2003. That memorandum, which was 39 pages in length, raised arguments that were not addressed in Lead Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification. Those arguments concern: (i) whether the investing public possessed the very information that Lead

DOCS\175285v1

Case 3:00-cv-00705-CFD

Document 86

Filed 01/30/2004

Page 2 of 4

Plaintiffs have alleged was omitted from Defendants' SEC filings, (ii) whether claims under Section 12(a)(2) can be brought against Defendants, (iii) whether aftermarket purchasers have standing to bring claims under Section 11 and (iv) whether aftermarket purchasers of securities in a secondary offering may trace their shares to the offering. 4. Defendants also raised numerous issues concerning Lead Plaintiffs' ability to serve as

class representatives. The factual record upon which they relied in raising these issues was developed at Lead Plaintiffs' depositions, and, thus, after Lead Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification. Those issues concern: (i) whether Lead Plaintiffs have standing to bring claims against Defendants under Section 12(a)(2), (ii) whether Lead Plaintiffs purchased their shares in the securities offering that is the subject of this case and (iii) whether Lead Plaintiffs can adequately represent the interests of the class members. 5. Because in the class certification context it is usually difficult to anticipate what new

arguments will be raised by defendants in their opposition, and class discovery is usually taken after plaintiffs' file their opening brief, plaintiffs' reply briefs often have to be significantly longer in length than their opening brief in order to fully respond to defendants' arguments. 6. Accordingly, in light of the new arguments raised by Defendants, the additional length

is necessary in order to fully respond to Defendants' opposition. Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs has inquired of counsel for Defendants who have indicated that they do not take a position on the request, or on any of the statements contained in this motion, and that they do not intend to file an opposition to this motion.

2
DOCS\175285v1

Case 3:00-cv-00705-CFD

Document 86

Filed 01/30/2004

Page 3 of 4

WHEREFORE, Lead Plaintiffs request for leave to file a reply brief that is 35 pages in length. Lead Plaintiffs' reply brief is currently due on February 12, 2004. Respectfully submitted,

By:_____________ ______ David A. Slossberg CT13116 Brian C. Fournier CT16272 HURWITZ & SAGARIN, LLC 147 N. Broad Street, P.O. Box 112 Milford, Connecticut 06460 (203) 877 - 8000 Liaison Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH LLP Sanford P. Dumain (CT08138) Carlos F. Ramirez (CT25340) One Penn Plaza 49th Floor New York, New York 10119 (212) 594-5300 Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs

3
DOCS\175285v1

Case 3:00-cv-00705-CFD

Document 86

Filed 01/30/2004

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing was served on January 30, 2004, by facsimile and FedEx, postage prepaid, to the following: Stanley A. Twardy, Jr. Thomas D. Goldberg Day, Berry & Howard LLP One Canterbury Green Stamford, CT 06901 Liaison Counsel Michael J. Chepiga William M. Regan Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP 425 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Counsel for Defendants

Brian C. Fournier

4
DOCS\175285v1