Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-03936/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-03936-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

CASE NO.: 3-06-CV-03936 MJJ

Michael D. Braun (167416)

BRAUN LAW GROUP, P.C.

12400 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 920

Los Angeles, CA 90025

Tel: (310) 442-7755

Fax: (310) 442-7756

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiff and the Class

Maya Saxena

Joseph E. White, III

SAXENA WHITE P.A.

2424 North Federal Highway, Suite 257

Boca Raton, FL 33431

Tel: (561) 394-3399

Fax: (561) 394-3382

Lewis Kahn

KAHN GAUTHIER SWICK, LLC

650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150

New Orleans, LA 70130

Tel: (504) 455-1400 

Fax: (504) 455-1498

Michael A. Swick

Kim E. Miller

KAHN GAUTHIER SWICK, LLC

12 East 41st St., 12th Floor 

New York, NY10017 

Tel: (212) 696-3730

Fax: (504) 455-1498

Lead Counsel for Plaintiff and the Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADRIAN MONGELI, Individually, And

On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

TERAYON COMMUNICATIONS

SYSTEMS, INC., ZAKI RAKIB, JERRY

D. CHASE, MARK A. RICHMAN,

EDWARD LOPEZ, RAY FRITZ, CAROL

LUSTENADER, MATTHEW MILLER,

SHLOMO RAKIB, DOUG SABELLA,

CHRISTOPHER SCHAEPE, MARK

SLAVEN, LEWIS SOLOMON, HOWARD

W. SPEAKS, ARTHUR T. TAYLOR,

DAVID WOODROW, and ERNST &

YOUNG, LLP

Defendants. ___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO.: 3-06-CV-03936 MJJ

CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE:

DATE: August 28, 2007

TIME: 2:00 P.M.

CTRM: 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco

Case 4:06-cv-03936-CW Document 77 Filed 08/22/07 Page 1 of 4
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

1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

CASE NO.: 3-06-CV-03936 MJJ

Counsel report that they have met and conferred regarding ADR and have reached the

following stipulation pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8 and ADR L.R. 3-5:

1. WHEREAS, parties believe that selection of an ADR process is premature until the

resolution of Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss;

2. WHEREAS, if the Court denies Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss in whole or in part,

parties will, within fourteen (14) days, meet and confer and submit a Stipulation and [Proposed]

Order selecting an appropriate ADR process.

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

Dated: August 7, 2007 Michael D. Braun

BRAUN LAW GROUP, P.C.

By: /S/ 

Michael D. Braun

12400 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 920

Los Angeles, CA 90025

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiff and the Class

Dated: August 7, 2007 Patrick E. Gibbs

Jennie Foote Feldman

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

By: /S/ 

Jennie Foote Feldman

140 Scott Drive

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Counsel for Defendant Terayon Communications

Systems, Inc. and Individual Defendants

Dated: August 7, 2007 Sheila A. Jambekar

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

By: /S/ 

One Market 

Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105

Counsel for Defendant Ernst & Young LLP

[PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED:

DATED: ____________, 2007 ________________________________

HON. MARTIN J. JENKINS

U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:06-cv-03936-CW Document 77 Filed 08/22/07 Page 2 of 4
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

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

CASE NO.: 3-06-CV-03936 MJJ

PROOF OF SERVICE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

)ss.:

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

I am employed in the county of Los Angeles, State of California, I am over the age of 18 and

not a party to the within action; my business address is 12400 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 920, Los

Angeles, CA 90025.

On August 7, 2007, using the Northern District of California’s Electronic Case Filing

System, with the ECF ID registered to Michael D. Braun, I filed and served the document(s)

described as: 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

The ECF System is designed to automatically generate an e-mail message to all parties in

the case, which constitutes service. According to the ECF/PACER system, for this case, the parties

served are as follows:

Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq. info@glancylaw.com

Michael M. Goldberg, Esq. info@glancylaw.com 

Kim E. Miller, Esq. kim.miller@kgscounsel.com

Maya Saxena, Esq. msaxena@saxenawhite.com

Counsel for Plaintiffs

Patrick Edward Gibbs, Esq. patrick.gibbs@lw.com

zoila.aurora@lw.com 

Counsel for Defendant

Terayon Communications Systems, Inc. 

and Individual Defendants

Sheila Anil Jambekar, Esq. sjambekar@morganlewis.com

John Henry Hemann, Esq. jhemann@morganlewis.com

Michael John Lawson, Esq. michael.lawson@morganlewis.com

Counsel for Defendant Ernst & Young LLP

On August 7, 2007, I served the document(s) described as:

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

by placing a true copy(ies) thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows:

Case 4:06-cv-03936-CW Document 77 Filed 08/22/07 Page 3 of 4
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

3

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SELECTING ADR PROCESS

CASE NO.: 3-06-CV-03936 MJJ

Lewis Kahn, Esq.

KAHN GAUTHIER SWICK, LLC

650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150

New Orleans, LA 70130

Tel: (504) 455-1400 

Fax: (504) 455-1498

Michael A. Swick, Esq.

KAHN GAUTHIER SWICK, LLC

12 East 41st St., 12th Floor 

New York, NY10017 

Tel: (212) 696-3730

Fax: (504) 455-1498

Lead Counsel for Plaintiff 

Adrian G. Mongeli and the Class

Bruce M. Cormier, Esq.

Joel E. Bonner, Esq.

ERNST & YOUNG LLP

1225 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C. 20036

Tel: (202) 327-7603

Fax: (202) 327-7601

Counsel for Defendant

Ernst & Young LLP

 I served the above document(s) as follows:

BY MAIL. I am familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing

correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. postal service on

that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California in the ordinary course

of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal

cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in an

affidavit.

I declare, pursuant to Civil L.R. 23-2, that on the date hereof I served a copy of the abovelisted document(s) on the Securities Class Action Clearinghouse by electronic mail through the

following electronic mail address provided by the Securities Class Action Clearinghouse:

scac@law.stanford.edu

I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction the

service was made.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the above is true

and correct.

Executed on August 7, 2007, at Los Angeles, California 90025.

 /S/ LEITZA MOLINAR 

 Leitza Molinar

Case 4:06-cv-03936-CW Document 77 Filed 08/22/07 Page 4 of 4