Filed: Feb. 18, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 18, 2020
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER COLM F. CONNOLLY , District Judge . The claims in this stockholder derivative action are, to use Plaintiff's words, "premised on the same facts" that underlie the derivative action styled Williams v. Polymeropoulos, No. 1:19-cv-04293-FB-LB (E.D.N.Y.) that was filed in the Eastern District of New York months before this action was filed. D.I. 20 at 20. Defendants have moved to transfer this case to the Eastern District where, in addition to the Williams case, there is a
Summary: MEMORANDUM ORDER COLM F. CONNOLLY , District Judge . The claims in this stockholder derivative action are, to use Plaintiff's words, "premised on the same facts" that underlie the derivative action styled Williams v. Polymeropoulos, No. 1:19-cv-04293-FB-LB (E.D.N.Y.) that was filed in the Eastern District of New York months before this action was filed. D.I. 20 at 20. Defendants have moved to transfer this case to the Eastern District where, in addition to the Williams case, there is a ..
More
MEMORANDUM ORDER
COLM F. CONNOLLY, District Judge.
The claims in this stockholder derivative action are, to use Plaintiff's words, "premised on the same facts" that underlie the derivative action styled Williams v. Polymeropoulos, No. 1:19-cv-04293-FB-LB (E.D.N.Y.) that was filed in the Eastern District of New York months before this action was filed. D.I. 20 at 20. Defendants have moved to transfer this case to the Eastern District where, in addition to the Williams case, there is a pending class action suit (Gordon v. Vanda Pharm. Inc., No. 1:19-cv-01108-FB-LB (E.D.N.Y.)). Plaintiffs allegations in this case arise out of the same underlying facts alleged in the Gordon case. Compare D.I. 1 ¶¶ 231-315 (alleging false and misleading statements and omissions concerning Fanapt), and id. ¶¶ 316-383 (alleging false and misleading statements and omissions concerning Hetlioz), and id. ¶¶ 384-405 (alleging false and misleading statements and omissions concerning tradipitant) with Amended Complaint, Gordon, No. 1:19-cv-01108-FB-LB, D.I. 29 ¶¶ 233-317 (alleging false and misleading statements and omissions concerning Fanapt), and id. ¶¶ 318-385 (alleging false and misleading statements and omissions concerning Hetlioz), and id. ¶¶ 386-407 (alleging false and misleading statements and omissions concerning tradipitant). Defendants have moved in the alternative for a stay of this case pending the resolution of the Gordon case.
I will deny Defendants' motion without prejudice and instead sua sponte stay this case pending the resolution of the Williams case. Plaintiff admits that the facts underlying Williams and this case are identical. Williams was filed first; staying this case will simplify the issues in question and promote judicial economy; and Plaintiff will suffer no prejudice as a result of the stay. Accordingly, a stay is justified. See Husqvarna AB v. Toro Co., 2016 WL 5213904, at *1 (D. Del. Sept. 20, 2016).
In the event the Williams case is resolved before the Gordon case, Defendants can refile their motion.
Wherefore, this 18th day of February 2020, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to transfer or, in the alternative, stay proceedings (D.I. 14) is DENIED and the case is STAYED pending the resolution of Williams v. Polymeropoulos, No. 1:19-cv-04293-FB-LB (E.D.N.Y.).
