Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486-101/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

[C 02-1486 CW] STIPULATION AND ORDER

[Counsel listed on signature page.] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

In re JDS UNIPHASE CORPORATION 

SECURITIES LITIGATION 

This Document Relates To: All Actions 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Master File No. C-02-1486 CW 

CLASS ACTION

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER PERMITTING PLAINTIFFS TO 

FILE CORRECTED DEPOSITION 

DESIGNATIONS AND FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS’ TO FILE 

OBJECTIONS AND COUNTERDESIGNATIONS TO PLAINTIFFS’ 

DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1581 Filed 10/03/07 Page 1 of 6
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

[C 02-1486 CW] STIPULATION AND ORDER

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court’s August 24, 2007 Order, the parties’ deposition 

designations were to be exchanged on August 24, 2007 in accordance with the Court’s Order for 

Pretrial Preparation (see Docket No. 1373); 

WHEREAS, on August 24, 2007, the parties timely exchanged their respective deposition 

designations; 

 WHEREAS, on August 24, 2007, the Court issued its Order regarding the parties’ 

respective summary judgment motions, which substantially narrowed the issues in this case (see 

Docket No. 1374); 

 WHEREAS, during the parties’ September 5, 2007 meet and confer, Defendants advised 

Plaintiffs that they believed Plaintiffs’ deposition designations were overbroad; 

 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs agreed to amend and narrow their deposition designations. Those 

revisions took Plaintiffs longer than they expected to complete, and Plaintiffs served revised 

designations on a rolling basis from September 12-20, 2007; 

 WHEREAS, as a result of Plaintiffs’ revised deposition designations, the parties agreed 

to a stipulation and proposed order that would have extended the parties’ deadline for filing 

deposition designations and objections and counter-designations to the opposing party’s 

designations with the Court to September 28, 2007; 

 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Court’s September 24, 2007 Order, the Court modified the 

parties’ stipulated deadline from September 28, 2007, to September 26, 2007 at 12:00 noon 

(see Docket No. 1491); 

 WHEREAS, due to a technical failure with the Electronic Case Filing system on 

September 24, 2007, the parties were unable to receive the Court’s September 24, 2007 Order 

until September 25, 2007; 

WHEREAS, on September 26, 2007, the parties timely filed their deposition designations 

and objections and counter-designations; 

WHEREAS, on September 26, 2007, Defendants advised the Court by letter that, in light 

of Plaintiffs’ revised designations and the delayed receipt of the Court’s September 24, 2007 

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1581 Filed 10/03/07 Page 2 of 6
 2 [C 02-1486 CW] STIPULATION AND ORDER 

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

Order, that they would file supplemental objections and counter-designations to Plaintiffs’ 

deposition designations no later than September 28, 2007 (see Docket No. 1536); 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs’ deposition designations filed on September 26, 2007 (see Docket 

No. 1534) contained inadvertent errors, and did not accurately reflect the revised designations 

exchanged with Defendants during September 12-20, 2007; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs attempted to correct the deposition designations by filing an errata 

on September 27, 2007 (see Docket No. 1545), which contained additional inadvertent errors and 

modifications, and did not accurately reflect the revised designations exchanged with Defendants 

during September 12-20, 2007; 

WHEREAS, on September 28, 2007, Defendants filed a motion to strike Plaintiffs’ 

September 27, 2007 deposition designations (see Docket No. 1549) and a motion to shorten time 

for briefing and hearing on their motion to strike; 

WHEREAS, the parties continued meeting and conferring about the scope of Plaintiffs’ 

designations in an effort to avoid burdening the Court with unnecessary motion practice; 

WHEREAS, on October 1, 2007, Plaintiffs provided Defendants with revised deposition 

designations, attached as Exhibit A, which substantially modified Plaintiffs’ original deposition 

designations; 

WHEREAS, the deposition designations attached as Exhibit A are Plaintiffs’ final 

designations and Plaintiffs will not seek a further extension of the designation deadline, nor will 

Plaintiffs seek to further modify their designations, but Plaintiffs may designate testimony from 

depositions that have not yet taken place; 

WHEREAS, on October 2, 2007, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to shorten time, 

as modified, for briefing and hearing on their motion to strike plaintiffs’ September 27, 2007 

deposition designations; 

WHEREAS, Defendants having reviewed Plaintiffs’ October 1, 2007 revised 

designations, anticipate that they will need until October 10, 2007 to prepare and file their 

objections and counter-designations with the Court. 

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1581 Filed 10/03/07 Page 3 of 6
 3 [C 02-1486 CW] STIPULATION AND ORDER 

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

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their counsel of 

record, that: 

 1. Plaintiffs’ deposition designations filed on September 26, 2007 (Docket No. 1534) 

and on September 27, 2007 (Docket No. 1545) are withdrawn; 

 2. Plaintiffs are granted leave to file the deposition designations attached as Exhibit A; 

 3. Defendants shall file and serve their objections and counter-designations to Plaintiffs’ 

deposition designations no later than October 10, 2007; 

 4. Defendants shall withdraw their motion to strike Plaintiffs’ deposition designations 

(Docket No. 1549), if the Court allows Defendants until October 10, 2007 to file their objections 

and counter-designations; 

 5. On the day after the Court so Orders this Stipulation, Plaintiffs shall file a modified 

Witness List to reflect the deletion of any witnesses that they no longer intend to call at trial 

(including through deposition testimony). Plaintiffs’ modified Witness List shall not include any 

new witnesses, but Plaintiffs may add witnesses to their list who are deposed subsequent to the 

date of this Stipulation. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: October 2, 2007 LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 

 

By: /s/ Anthony J. Harwood 

 

Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiff 

Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds 

 BERMAN DeVALERIO PEASE TABACCO 

 BURT & PUCILLO 

Liaison Counsel for Lead Plaintiff 

Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds 

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1581 Filed 10/03/07 Page 4 of 6
 4 [C 02-1486 CW] STIPULATION AND ORDER 

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

Dated: October 2, 2007 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

 

By: /s/ Philip T. Besirof 

Attorneys for Defendants 

JDS Uniphase Corporation, Charles J. Abbe, Jozef 

Straus, and Anthony Muller 

Dated: October 2, 2007 HELLER EHRMAN LLP 

 

By: /s/ Howard Caro 

 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Kevin Kalkhoven 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 CLAUDIA WILKEN 

 United States District Judge 

10/2/07

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1581 Filed 10/03/07 Page 5 of 6
 5 [C 02-1486 CW] STIPULATION AND ORDER 

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

I, Anthony Harwood, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Permitting Plaintiffs to File Corrected Deposition Designations 

and for Extension of Time for Defendants’ to File Objections and Counter-Designations to 

Plaintiffs’ Deposition Designations. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest 

that Philip Besirof, attorney for Defendants, JDS Uniphase Corporation, Charles J. Abbe, Jozef 

Straus, and Anthony R. Muller, and Howard Caro, attorney for Kevin Kalkhoven, have 

concurred in this filing. 

Dated: October 2, 2007 LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 

 By: /s/ Anthony J. Harwood 

 Counsel for Lead Plaintiff 

 Connecticut Retirement Plans 

 and Trust Funds 

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1581 Filed 10/03/07 Page 6 of 6