Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04346/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04346-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-1- 2907587_1.DOC 

BORIS FELDMAN, State Bar No. 128838 

DOUGLAS J. CLARK, State Bar No. 171499 

IGNACIO E. SALCEDA, State Bar No. 164017 

RANDOLPH GAW, State Bar No. 223718 

ERIN J. HOLLAND, State Bar No. 233305 

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

650 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 

Telephone: (650) 493-9300 

Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 

E-mail: boris.feldman@wsgr.com 

Attorneys for Defendants Rambus Inc., 

Thomas J. Bentley, Sunlin Chou, 

Michael P. Farmwald, Mark Horowitz, 

Harold Hughes, Kevin Kennedy, 

Satish Rishi and Abraham Sofaer 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

MICHAEL A. BERNSTEIN PROFIT SHARING 

KEOGH PLAN and RONALD L. SCHWARCZ, 

on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly 

Situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HAROLD HUGHES, DAVID MOORING, 

ROBERT K. EULAU, GEOFFREY TATE, 

BRUCE DUNLEVIE, P. MICHAEL 

FARMWALD, JOHN D. DANFORTH, MARK 

HOROWITZ, KEVIN KENNEDY, CHARLES 

GESCHKE, WILLIAM DAVIDOW, and 

RAMBUS INC., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO.: C 06-4346 JF 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

CONSOLIDATION AND 

SCHEDULING ORDER

JOSEPH MANIGLIA, Individually and On Behalf 

of All Others Similarly Situated. 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HAROLD HUGHES, GEOFF TATE, ROBERT 

EULAU, SATISH RISHI and RAMBUS INC., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO.: C 06-4427 RS 

**E-filed 9/26/06**

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 1 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-2- 2907587_1.DOC 

ANATOLE OLCZAK, On Behalf of Himself And 

All Others Similarly Situated. 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

RAMBUS INC., HAROLD HUGHES, ROBERT 

K. EULAU, GEOFFREY TATE, BRUCE 

DUNLEVIE, P. MICHAEL FARMWALD, 

KEVIN KENNEDY, CHARLES GESCHKE, and 

WILLIAM DAVIDOW, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO.: C 06-4629 BZ 

MARILYN FREEDMAN, on behalf of herself and 

all others similarly situated. 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

RAMBUS INC., HAROLD HUGHES, GEOFF 

TATE, J. THOMAS BENTLEY, SUNLIN CHOU, 

JOHN DANFORTH, WILLIAM DAVIDOW, 

BRUCE DUNLEVIE, ROBERT K. EULAU, P. 

MICHAEL FARMWALD, MARK HOROWITZ, 

KEVIN KENNEDY, DAVID MOORING, and 

ABRAHAM SOFAER, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO.: C 06-4715 WHA 

WENDELL WILLIAMS, Individually and on 

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated. 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HAROLD HUGHES, DAVID MOORING, 

ROBERT K. EULAU, GEOFFREY TATE, 

BRUNCE DUNLEVIE, P. MICHAEL 

FARMWALD, JOHN D. DANFORTH, MARK 

HOROWITZ, KEVIN KENNEDY, CHARLES 

GESCHKE, WILLIAM DAVIDOW, and 

RAMBUS, INC., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CASE NO.: C 06-4732 MJJ 

The parties hereby stipulate, and the Court hereby orders, as follows: 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 2 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-3- 2907587_1.DOC 

CONSOLIDATION OF RELATED CASES

1. The following actions are related cases: 

Michael A. Bernstein Profit Sharing Plan v. Hughes, et al., No. C 06-4346 JF; 

Maniglia v. Hughes, et al., No. C 06-4427 RS; 

Olczak v. Rambus Inc., et al., No. C 06-4629 BZ; 

Freedman v. Rambus Inc., et al., No. C 06-4715 WHA; and 

Williams v. Hughes, et al., No. C 06-4732 MJJ. 

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a), these cases are hereby consolidated 

into Civil Action No. C 06-4346 JF, for all purposes, including pretrial proceedings, trial and 

appeal. The consolidated action shall be captioned: “In re Rambus Inc. Securities Litigation.” 

2. All related actions that are subsequently filed in, or transferred to, this District 

shall be consolidated into this action for pretrial purposes. This Order shall apply to every such 

related action, absent order of the Court. A party that objects to such consolidation, or to any 

other provision of this Order, must file an application for relief from this Order within thirty (30) 

days after the date on which a copy of the order is served on the party's counsel. 

3. This Order is entered without prejudice to the rights of any party to apply for 

severance of any claim or action, for good cause shown. 

MASTER DOCKET AND CAPTION

4. The docket in Civil Action No. C 06-4346 JF shall constitute the Master Docket 

for this action. 

5. Every pleading filed in the consolidated action shall bear the following caption: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

IN RE RAMBUS INC. SECURITIES 

LITIGATION 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Master File No. 06-4346 JF 

This Document Relates To: 

) 

) 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 3 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-4- 2907587_1.DOC 

6. The file in Civil Action No. C 06-4346 JF shall constitute a Master File for every 

action in the consolidated action. When the document being filed pertains to all actions, the 

phrase “All Actions” shall appear immediately after the phrase “This Documents Relates To:”. 

When a pleading applies only to some, but not all, of the actions, the document shall list, 

immediately after the phrase “This Documents Relates To:”, the docket number for each 

individual action to which the document applies, along with the last name of the first-listed 

plaintiff in said action. 

7. The parties shall file a Notice of Related Cases whenever a case that should be 

consolidated into this action is filed in, or transferred to, this District. If the Court determines 

that the case is related, the clerk shall: 

(a) place a copy of this Order in the separate file for such action; 

(b) serve on plaintiff's counsel in the new case a copy of this Order; 

(c) direct that this Order be served upon defendants in the new case; and 

(d) make the appropriate entry in the Master Docket. 

LEAD PLAINTIFF AND LEAD COUNSEL

8. After the Court has designated a Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel in accordance 

with the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, Lead Counsel shall have authority to speak 

for, and enter into agreements on behalf of, plaintiffs in all matters regarding pretrial procedures, 

discovery, and settlement negotiations. Lead Counsel shall manage the prosecution of this 

litigation to avoid duplicative or unproductive activities. Lead Counsel shall be responsible for 

coordination of all activities and appearances on behalf of plaintiffs and for dissemination of 

notices and orders. Lead Counsel shall be responsible for communications with the Court. Lead 

Counsel shall maintain a master service list of all parties and counsel. 

9. Defendants' counsel may rely upon agreements made with Lead Counsel. Such 

agreements shall be binding on all plaintiffs. 

// 

// 

// 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 4 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-5- 2907587_1.DOC 

PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS

10. Defendants are not required to respond to the complaint in any action 

consolidated into this action, other than the consolidated complaint or a complaint designated as 

the operative complaint by Lead Counsel. 

11. Unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties or ordered by the Court, Lead 

Counsel shall file a consolidated complaint or file a designation of a complaint as the operative 

complaint forty-five (45) days after the Court enters an Order appointing a Lead Plaintiff and 

Lead Counsel. The consolidated complaint or complaint designated as the operative complaint 

shall supersede all complaints filed in any of the actions consolidated therein. 

12. Unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties and approved by the Court, the time 

for all defendants to respond is extended until forty-five (45) days after the later of (a) the filing 

of the consolidated complaint; or (b) the filing designating a complaint as the operative 

complaint by Lead Counsel. Unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties and approved by the 

Court, if defendants file any motions directed at the complaint, the opposition brief shall be filed 

within forty-five (45) days of that response, and the reply brief shall be filed thirty (30) days 

thereafter. 

13. The parties shall serve all papers on each other by hand, by overnight delivery, by 

facsimile, or by e-filing, unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties. Notwithstanding the 

foregoing, defendants may serve plaintiffs' counsel, other than Lead Counsel, by first-class mail, 

unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties. 

Dated: September 20, 2006 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

By: /s/ Randolph Gaw 

 Randolph Gaw 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Rambus Inc., Thomas J. Bentley, Sunlin Chou, Michael P. 

Farmwald, Mark Horowitz, Harold Hughes, Kevin 

Kennedy, Satish Rishi and Abraham Sofaer 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 5 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-6- 2907587_1.DOC 

Dated: September 20, 2006 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

By: /s/ Darryl P. Rains 

Darryl P. Rains 

Attorneys for Defendant John Danforth 

Dated: September 20, 2006 SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP 

By: /s/ Justin S. Chang 

Justin S. Chang 

Attorneys for Defendants 

William Davidow, Bruce Dunlevie and Charles Geschke 

Dated: September 20, 2006 IRELL & MANELLA LLP 

By: /s/ Daniel P. Lefler 

Daniel P. Lefler 

Attorneys for Defendant Geoffrey Tate 

Dated: September 20, 2006 STULL, STULL & BRODY 

By: /s/ Howard T. Longman 

Howard T. Longman 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Michael A. Bernstein Profit Sharing Keogh Plan and 

Ronald L. Schwarcz 

Dated: September 20, 2006 HULETT HARPER STEWART LLP 

By: /s/ Sarah P. Weber 

Sarah P. Weber 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Joseph Maniglia 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 6 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-7- 2907587_1.DOC 

Dated: September 20, 2006 KLAFTER & OLSEN LLP 

By: /s/ Kurt B. Olsen 

Kurt B, Olsen 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Anatole Olczak 

Dated: September 20, 2006 JOHNSON & PERKINSON 

By: /s/ James F. Conway, III 

James F. Conway, III 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Wendell Williams 

Dated: September 20, 2006 GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 

By: /s/ Lionel Z. Glancy 

Lionel Z. Glancy 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Marilyn Freedman 

 IT IS SO ORDERED: 

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the Court hereby orders, that pursuant to Federal Rule 

of Civil Procedure 42(a), the following related actions are consolidated into Civil Action No. C 

06-4346 JF for pretrial proceedings, trial, and appeal: 

Michael A. Bernstein Profit Sharing Plan v. Hughes, et al., No. C 06-4346 JF; 

Maniglia v. Hughes, et al., No. C 06-4427 RS; 

Olczak v. Rambus Inc., et al., No. C 06-4629 BZ; 

Freedman v. Rambus Inc., et al., No. C 06-4715 WHA; and 

Williams v. Hughes, et al., No. C 06-4732 MJJ. 

The consolidated action shall be captioned: “In re Rambus Inc. Securities Litigation.” 

All related actions that are subsequently filed in, or transferred to, this District shall be 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 7 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-8- 2907587_1.DOC 

consolidated into this action for pretrial purposes. This Order shall apply to every such related 

action, absent order of the Court. 

Defendants are not required to respond to the complaint in any action consolidated into 

this action, other than the consolidated complaint or a complaint designated as the operative 

complaint by Lead Counsel. 

Unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties or ordered by the Court, Lead Counsel shall 

file a consolidated complaint or file a designation of a complaint as the operative complaint 

forty-five (45) days after the Court enters an Order appointing a Lead Plaintiff and Lead 

Counsel. The consolidated complaint or complaint designated as the operative complaint shall 

supersede all complaints filed in any of the actions consolidated therein. 

Unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties and approved by the Court, the time for all 

defendants to respond is extended until forty-five (45) days after the later of (i) the filing of the 

consolidated complaint; or (ii) the filing designating a complaint as the operative complaint by 

Lead Counsel. Unless otherwise agreed upon by the parties and approved by the Court, if 

defendants file any motions directed at the complaint, the opposition brief shall be filed within 

forty-five (45) days of that response, and the reply brief shall be filed thirty (30) days thereafter. 

Dated: 

Hon. Jeremy D. Fogel 

United States District Court Judge 

9/22/06

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 8 of 9
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 

STIP & [PROP] CONSOLIDATION & SCHEDULING ORDER;

CASE NOS. C 06-4346 JF; C 06-4427 RS; C 06-4629 BZ;

C 06-4715 WHA; AND C 06-4732 MJJ 

-9- 2907587_1.DOC 

I, Randolph Gaw, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to 

file the Stipulation and [Proposed] Consolidation and Scheduling Order. In compliance with 

General Order 45.X.B, I hereby attest that Darryl P. Rains, Justin S. Chang, Daniel P. Lefler, 

Howard T. Longman, Sarah P. Weber, Kurt B. Olsen, James F. Conway, III and Hal K. Levitte 

have concurred in this filing. 

Dated: September 20, 2006 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

By: /s/ Randolph Gaw 

 Randolph Gaw 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 44 Filed 09/26/06 Page 9 of 9