Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-06003/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-06003-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Stockholders Suits

---

1 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY IN CONNECTION 

WITH THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 

Master File No. C-12-6003-CRB (EDL) 

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 

GREENFIELD & GOODMAN LLC 

Richard D. Greenfield (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

Marguerite R. Goodman 

Ilene F. Brookler (SBN 269422) 

250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor 

New York, NY 10013 

Tel: (917) 495-4446 

Fax: (212) 355-9592 

whitehatrdg@earthlink.net 

twowhitehats@earthlink.net 

ibrookler@gmail.com

Attorneys for Shareholder 

A.J. Copeland 

(Additional counsel on signature page) 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

IN RE HEWLETT-PACKARD

COMPANY SHAREHOLDER 

DERIVATIVE LITIGATION 

This Document Relates To: 

ALL ACTIONS.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Master File No. C-12-6003-CRB (EDL) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY IN 

CONNECTION WITH THE THIRD 

AMENDED AND RESTATED 

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT AS 

MODIFIED 

Case 3:12-cv-06003-CRB Document 331 Filed 03/27/15 Page 1 of 5
2 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY IN CONNECTION 

WITH THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 

Master File No. C-12-6003-CRB (EDL) 

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 

WHEREAS, A.J. Copeland, a shareholder of Hewlett-Packard Company (“HP” 

or the “Company”), has moved the Court for an order permitting Mr. Copeland to take 

discovery, including serving the attached document requests and interrogatories, which 

he asserts is necessary for a meaningful record for the final approval hearing on July 24, 

2015; 

WHEREAS, on March 25, 2015, the Court denied such motion without 

prejudice; 

WHEREAS, counsel for the HP and Plaintiff subsequently conferred with 

counsel for Mr. Copeland; and 

WHEREAS, the participants have agreed to resolve the issue raised by the 

motion as to whether Mr. Copeland may serve the attached discovery requests upon HP 

and Plaintiff, subject to Order of the Court, as follows: 

1. The Document Requests attached hereto as Exhibit A and Interrogatories 

as Exhibit B (collectively “Discovery”) shall be deemed served on HP and 

Plaintiff. 

2. HP and Plaintiff, through their respective counsel, shall serve their 

objections, if any, to such Discovery within 14 days following service. 

3. HP and Plaintiff shall otherwise respond to the Discovery within 21 days 

following service. 

4. Counsel for Mr. Copeland, HP and Plaintiff shall “meet and confer” 

within 7 days following service of any such objections and additional 

responses to Discovery to determine whether the objections can be 

withdrawn or limited and in an attempt to resolve any disputes regarding 

the responses to the Discovery, generally. 

Case 3:12-cv-06003-CRB Document 331 Filed 03/27/15 Page 2 of 5
3 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY IN CONNECTION 

WITH THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 

Master File No. C-12-6003-CRB (EDL) 

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 

5. To the extent there are any remaining disagreements regarding the 

Discovery and/or the objections thereto, Mr. Copeland shall promptly 

move the Court for relief, such motion to be made returnable 14 Days 

following service thereupon. the parties shall file a joint letter no later than 

five business days after the meet and confer session, unless otherwise 

directed by the court. Lead trial counsel for each party must sign the letter, 

which shall include an attestation that the parties met and conferred in 

person or by telephone regarding all issues prior to filing the letter. Going 

issue-by-issue, the joint letter shall describe each unresolved issue, 

summarize each party’s position with appropriate legal authority, and 

provide each party’s final proposed compromise before moving to the next 

issue. The joint letter shall not exceed eight pages (12-point font or 

greater; margins no less than one inch) without leave of court. Parties are 

expected to plan for and cooperate in preparing the joint letter so that each 

side has adequate time to address the arguments. If a joint letter is not 

possible, each side may submit a letter not to exceed three pages, which 

shall include an explanation of why a joint letter was not possible. The 

parties shall submit one exhibit that sets forth each disputed discovery 

request in full, followed immediately by the objections and/or responses 

thereto. No other information shall be included in the exhibit. No other 

exhibits shall be submitted without prior court approval. The court will 

review the submission(s) and determine whether formal briefing or 

proceedings are necessary. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: March 27, 2015 Attorneys for Shareholder A.J. Copeland 

By: /s/ Richard D. Greenfield 

Case 3:12-cv-06003-CRB Document 331 Filed 03/27/15 Page 3 of 5
4 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY IN CONNECTION 

WITH THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 

Master File No. C-12-6003-CRB (EDL) 

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 

Richard D. Greenfield (pro hac vice) 

Ilene F. Brookler (SBN 269422) 

Marguerite R. Goodman 

GREENFIELD & GOODMAN, LLC 

250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor 

New York, NY 10013 

Tel: 917-495-4446 

ibrookler@gmail.com 

whitehatrdg@earthlink.net 

twowhitehats@earthlink.net 

Dated: March 27, 2015 Attorneys for Defendant 

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY 

By: /s/ Marc Wolinsky 

WACHTELL, LIPTON, ROSEN & KATZ 

MARC WOLINSKY (pro hac vice) 

GEORGE T. CONWAY III (pro hac vice) 

VINCENT G. LEVY (pro hac vice) 

51 West 52nd Street 

New York, NY 10019 

Tel./Fax: 212.403.1000/2000 

MWolinsky@wlrk.com 

GTConway@wlrk.com 

VGLevy@wlrk.com 

Dated: March 27, 2015 Attorneys for Lead Counsel for Plaintiff Stanley 

Morrical, derivatively on behalf of Hewlett-Packard 

Company 

By: /s/ Mark C. Molumphy 

JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (Cal. SBN 36324) 

jcotchett@cpmlegal.com 

MARK C. MOLUMPHY (Cal. SBN 

168009) 

mmolumphy@cpmlegal.com 

NANCY L. FINEMAN (Cal. SBN: 124870) 

nfineman@cpmlegal.com 

COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP 

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Telephone: (650) 697-6000 

Facsimile: (650) 697-0577 

Case 3:12-cv-06003-CRB Document 331 Filed 03/27/15 Page 4 of 5
5 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING DISCOVERY IN CONNECTION 

WITH THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 

STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT 

Master File No. C-12-6003-CRB (EDL) 

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 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing, 

IT IS SO ORDERED AS MODIFIED. 

Date: March 27, 2015 ________________________________ 

 Elizabeth D. Laporte 

United States Magistrate Judge 

 

Case 3:12-cv-06003-CRB Document 331 Filed 03/27/15 Page 5 of 5