Free Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02297-BTM-NLS

Document 12

Filed 01/02/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
SD\614669.1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HCL PARTNERS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, On Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated, CLASS ACTION NO. 07 CV 2245 BTM (NLS) ORDER ON JOINT MOTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME FOR RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND ADDITIONAL FILING PERIODS

LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC., S. DOUGLAS HUTCHESON, MARK H. RACHESKY, AMIN I. KHALIFA, and PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS Defendants.

The Honorable Barry T. Moskowitz, United States District Court Judge

CASE CAPTIONS CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

No. 07 CV 2245 BTM (NLS) ORDER ON JOINT MOTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME FOR RESPONSE TO COMPLAINTS

Case 3:07-cv-02297-BTM-NLS

Document 12

Filed 01/02/2008

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Defendants. 8 9 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
SD\614669.1

FRANK CHAREK, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC., S. DOUGLAS HUTCHESON, MARK H. RACHESKY, AMIN I. KHALFIA, GLENN UMETSU and DEAN M. LUVISA,

CLASS ACTION NO. 07 CV 2256 BTM (NLS)

DEVAY CAMPBELL, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,

CLASS ACTION NO. 07 CV 2297 BTM (NLS)

LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC. S. DOUGLAS HUTCHESON, MARK H. RACHESKY, AMIN I. KHALFA, GLENN UMETSU and DEAN M. LUVISA, Defendants.

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Defendants need not answer or otherwise respond to the complaints

filed in the above-captioned matter or any subsequently-filed, related actions that are transferred to Judge Moskowitz pursuant to the "Low Number" Rule until a date after the Lead Plaintiff and Lead Plaintiff's Counsel are appointed and file a Consolidated Complaint. 2. The Lead Plaintiff shall have 45 days after a Lead Plaintiff is appointed to

file and serve a Consolidated Complaint; and 3. Defendants shall have 45 days after the filing and service of a Consolidated

Complaint to move to dismiss or otherwise respond; 4. The Lead Plaintiff shall have 45 days after the filing and service of

Defendants' motion to dismiss to file an opposition;

No. 07 CV 2245 BTM (NLS) ORDER ON JOINT MOTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME FOR RESPONSE TO COMPLAINTS

Case 3:07-cv-02297-BTM-NLS

Document 12

Filed 01/02/2008

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

5.

Defendants shall have 30 days after the filing and service of Lead

Plaintiff's opposition to file a reply.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 2, 2008

____________________________________ Hon. Barry Ted Moskowitz United States District Judge

3
SD\614669.1

No. 07 CV 2245 BTM (NLS) ORDER ON JOINT MOTION REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME FOR RESPONSE TO COMPLAINTS