Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Gennaro v. National Research Corporation, 4:17-CV-441.4:17-CV-3152. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20180308b07 Visitors: 2
Filed: Mar. 07, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 07, 2018
Summary: ORDER JOHN M. GERRARD , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs' motions for preliminary injunction (case no. 4:17-cv-441 filing 9; case no 4:17-cv-3152 filing 16). The Court has, on its own initiative, reviewed this matter for purposes of case progression. The motions for preliminary injunction have been stayed to this point, contemplating a possible amended complaint in light of expected revisions to the underlying corporate reorganization proposal. Case no. 4:1
More

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the plaintiffs' motions for preliminary injunction (case no. 4:17-cv-441 filing 9; case no 4:17-cv-3152 filing 16). The Court has, on its own initiative, reviewed this matter for purposes of case progression. The motions for preliminary injunction have been stayed to this point, contemplating a possible amended complaint in light of expected revisions to the underlying corporate reorganization proposal. Case no. 4:17-cv-441 filing 35; case no 4:17-cv-3152 filing 32; see case no. 4:17-cv-441 filing 33; case no 4:17-cv-3152 filing 30.

It appears to the Court that those revisions have been made: the plaintiffs' complaints and motions for preliminary injunction were premised on Preliminary Proxy Soliciting materials filed with the SEC that have since been supplanted by a substantially different proposal. Compare case no. 4:17cv-441 filing 11-2, and case no 4:17-cv-3152 filing 18-2, with National Research Corp., Preliminary Proxy Soliciting materials (Form PRER14A) (Feb. 23, 2018), available at https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ 70487/000143774918003218/nrci20180219_prer14a.htm. Regardless of what disagreements might remain among the parties, the specific grounds on which the plaintiffs sought to preliminarily enjoin consummation of the originally proposed transaction have been mooted by the revised proposal.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The parties' motions for preliminary injunction (case no. 4:17-cv-441 filing 9; case no 4:17-cv-3152 filing 16) are denied as moot. 2. This matter is referred to the Magistrate Judge for case progression.
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