Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03263/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03263-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
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 RE PLAINTIFFS’ RULE 54(B) MOTION

CASE NO. 5:14-CV-03263 

Norman J. Blears (SBN 95600) 

nblears@sidley.com 

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 

1001 Page Mill Road, Building 1 

Palo Alto, California 94304 

Telephone: (650) 565-7000 

Robin E. Wechkin (admitted pro hac vice) 

rwechkin@sidley.com 

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 

701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4200 

Seattle, Washington 

Telephone: (206) 262-7680 

Michael L. Charlson (SBN 122125) 

mcharlson@velaw.com

VINSON & ELKINS LLP 

525 Market Street, Suite 2750 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Telephone: (415) 979-6910 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

MARY JANE JASIN and THOMAS JASIN,

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

VIVUS, INC., LELAND F. WILSON, 

TIMOTHY MORRIS, and PETER Y. TAM 

Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No.: 5:14-CV-03263 BLF

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFFS’ RULE 

54(B) MOTION 

Case 5:14-cv-03263-BLF Document 37 Filed 09/21/15 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 RE PLAINTIFFS’ RULE 54(B) MOTION

CASE NO. 5:14-CV-03263 

STIPULATION 

WHEREAS: 

1. The plaintiffs in this action filed their Second Amended Complaint on August 14, 

2015. The parties have stipulated to, and the Court has approved, a schedule pursuant to which 

defendants’ response is due on October 2, 2015, and, if defendants’ response takes the form of a 

motion to dismiss, the opposition to and reply in support of that motion are due November 20, 2015 

and December 15, 2015 respectively. Dkt # 34. 

2. Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is scheduled on the 

Court’s calendar for hearing on January 14, 2016. 

3. On September 10, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion for entry of partial judgment under 

Rule 54(b). Dkt. # 35. Defendants intend to oppose that motion. Plaintiffs have scheduled their 

Rule 54(b) motion for hearing on the Court’s calendar on January 14, 2016, the same date 

defendants’ motion to dismiss is scheduled to be heard. 

4. The parties believe the interests of efficiency will be best served if briefing on the 

plaintiffs’ Rule 54(b) motion proceeds according to the same schedule as briefing on defendants’ 

motion to dismiss, particularly as the two motions are scheduled for hearing on the same date. 

THE PARTIES THEREFORE STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 

 1. Defendants’ opposition to plaintiffs’ Rule 54(b) motion should be filed on or before 

November 20, 2015. 

 2. Plaintiffs’ reply in support of their Rule 54(b) motion should be filed on or before 

December 15, 2015. 

 

Dated: September 18, 2015 By: s/ Norman J. Blears 

Norman J. Blears 

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 

Counsel for Defendants 

Case 5:14-cv-03263-BLF Document 37 Filed 09/21/15 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 RE PLAINTIFFS’ RULE 54(B) MOTION

CASE NO. 5:14-CV-03263 

Dated: September 18, 2015 By: s/ Rosemary M. Rivas 

Rosemary M. Rivas 

Finkelstein Thompson LLP 

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 300 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 398-8700 

L. Kendall Satterfield 

Michael G. McClellan 

Rosalee B.C. Thomas 

Finkelstein Thompson LLP 

1077 30th St NW, Suite 150 

Washington, D.C. 20007 

Telephone: (202) 337-8000 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Case 5:14-cv-03263-BLF Document 37 Filed 09/21/15 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 RE RESPONSE TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

CASE NO. 5:14-CV-03263 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation above, the Court orders as follows: 

1. Defendants’ opposition to plaintiffs’ Rule 54(b) motion is due November 20, 2015. 

2. Plaintiffs’ reply in support of their Rule 54(b) motion is due December 15, 2015. 

 

 

Dated: September 21, 2015 HON. BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge 

Case 5:14-cv-03263-BLF Document 37 Filed 09/21/15 Page 4 of 4