Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

In re Lendingclub Securities Litigation, 3:16-CV-02627-WHA. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20170221e05 Visitors: 1
Filed: Feb. 17, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 17, 2017
Summary: CLASS ACTION STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARING ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS WILLIAM H. ALSUP , District Judge . Pursuant to the Northern District of California Civil Local Rules ("Local Rules") 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, defendants LendingClub Corporation ("LendingClub" or the "Company"), Daniel T. Ciporin, Jeffrey Crowe, Carrie Dolan, Rebecca Lynn, John J. Mack, Mary Meeker, John C. (Hans) Morris, Lawrence H. Summers and Simon Williams (collectively, the "LendingClub Defendant
More

CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARING ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Pursuant to the Northern District of California Civil Local Rules ("Local Rules") 6-1, 6-2, and 7-12, defendants LendingClub Corporation ("LendingClub" or the "Company"), Daniel T. Ciporin, Jeffrey Crowe, Carrie Dolan, Rebecca Lynn, John J. Mack, Mary Meeker, John C. (Hans) Morris, Lawrence H. Summers and Simon Williams (collectively, the "LendingClub Defendants"), defendant Renaud Laplanche, defendants Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Goldman, Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Allen & Company LLC, Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated, BMO Capital Markets Corp., William Blair & Company, L.L.C., and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC (collectively, the "Underwriter Defendants" and together with the other defendants, the "Defendants"), and lead plaintiff Water and Power Employees' Retirement, Disability and Death Plan of the City of Los Angeles ("Lead Plaintiff" and together with Defendants, the "Parties") in the above-captioned action, by and through their counsel, hereby stipulate to the following:

WHEREAS, on January 20, 2017, Defendants filed motions to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint ("Motions to Dismiss") [Dkt. Nos. 139, 142 and 148], and noticed a hearing date of March 2, 2017;

WHEREAS, prior to filing the Motions to Dismiss, on November 10, 2016, the Parties, which at that time did not include the Underwriter Defendants, filed the Joint Case Management Conference Statement [Dkt. No. 117] which requested that the hearing on motions to dismiss not be set during the week of March 6 through 10, 2017, due to scheduling conflicts;

WHEREAS, on February 8, 2017, the Court entered a notice continuing the hearing to March 8, 2017 [Dkt. No. 155];

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred, obtained from the Court alternative available dates for the hearing, and have agreed that the hearing should be set for March 23, 2017, at 8:00 a.m.;

IT IS ACCORDINGLY STIPULATED, by and between the undersigned counsel for the parties, that subject to approval by the Court, the hearing on the Motions to Dismiss should be rescheduled from March 8, 2017 to March 23, 2017, at 8:00 a.m.

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), all signatories concur in filing this stipulation.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing on defendants' motions to dismiss is continued to March 23, 2017 at 8:00 a.m.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer