Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-03396/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-03396-7/pdf.json

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

---

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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW 

3179497_2.DOC 

NINA F. LOCKER, State Bar No. 123838 

Email: nlocker@wsgr.com 

STEVEN GUGGENHEIM, State Bar No. 201386 

Email: sguggenheim@wsgr.com 

JONI OSTLER, State Bar No. 230009 

Email: jostler@wsgr.com 

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

Professional Corporation 

650 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 

Telephone: (650) 493-9300 

Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 

Attorneys for Defendants Juniper Networks, Inc., 

Robert M. Calderoni, Lloyd Carney, Robert R.B. 

Dykes, Kenneth A. Goldman, Vinod Khosla, 

Ashok Krishnamurthi, Kenneth Levy, Scott 

Kriens, Stratton Sclavos, Pradeep Sindhu, Peter 

Wexler, Marcel Gani, William R. Hearst III, and 

William R. Stensrud 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

In re JUNIPER DERIVATIVE ACTIONS 

This Document Relates To: 

ALL ACTIONS. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 5:06-cv-03396-JW 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT 

STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Ware

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 1 of 7
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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW 

-1- 3179497_2.DOC 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-10(d) and this Court’s Standing Order, the parties to the 

above-entitled action jointly submit this Case Management Statement Conference for the Case 

Management Conference scheduled on September 10, 2007. 

1. Description of Procedural Status of the Case 

On May 24, 2006, plaintiff Timothy W. Hill filed a shareholder derivative action on 

behalf of Juniper Networks, Inc. (“Juniper” or the “Company”) asserting claims against certain 

of the Company’s current and former officers and directors (“defendants”). Subsequently, six 

additional plaintiffs filed related stockholder actions. In Orders dated July 14, 2006, August 11, 

2006, and September 1, 2006, the Court deemed the six additional actions related and ordered the 

cases reassigned to this Court. 

By Order dated October 19, 2006, the Court consolidated the seven related actions, 

appointed Hill, Employer-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Pension Trust Fund, and Indiana 

State District Council of Laborers and HOD Carriers Pension Fund Lead Plaintiffs, and 

appointed Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP and Schiffrin Barroway Topaz 

& Kessler, LLP Lead Counsel. The Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint on April 11, 2007. 

On June 8, 2007, the parties stipulated to a temporary stay of this action to allow time to 

conduct settlement discussions and/or mediation. By Order dated June 12, 2007, the Court 

granted the requested stay. The parties currently have a meeting planned for September 11, 

2007. Accordingly, the parties propose that the temporary stay in this case be continued to allow 

the parties additional time to conduct settlement discussions, and that the parties shall continue to 

meet and confer, and confer with the Court, to set a further case management conference in 

November 2007 to revisit the status of the case. 

2. Jurisdiction and Service 

Service or waivers of service have been effectuated as to all defendants. At this time, 

there are no factual issues as to personal jurisdiction or venue that remain unresolved. 

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 2 of 7
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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW

-2- 3179497_2.DOC 

3. Events at issue. 

Plaintiffs’ Position: 

This is a shareholders’ derivative action brought on behalf of Juniper against certain of its 

present and former officers and directors for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust 

enrichment, breaches of California Corporations Code § 25402, and violations of § 10(b), Rule 

10b-5, § 14(a), and § 20(a) of the 1934 Securities and Exchange Act in connection with Juniper’s 

allegedly improper granting of and accounting for stock options. Plaintiffs allege that the 

defendants allowed Juniper insiders to divert millions of dollars of corporate assets to themselves 

via the manipulation of the grant dates associated with options awarded to insiders to purchase 

millions of shares of Juniper stock—a scheme referred to as “backdating.” 

On August 10, 2006, Juniper disclosed in a Form 8-K filed with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (“SEC”) that it has preliminarily concluded that “the actual measurement 

dates for financial accounting purposes of certain stock option grants issued in the past differ 

from the recorded grant dates” of the stock options. As a result, Juniper announced that the 

Company will need to restate historical financial statements and that financial statements and all 

earnings press releases issued by the Company on or after January 1, 2006 can no longer be 

relied upon. 

Defendants’ Position: 

Nominal Defendant Juniper maintains that plaintiffs do not have standing to assert claims 

on the Company’s behalf. The defendants deny plaintiffs’ allegations and maintain that they did 

not engage in any wrongdoing and did not breach any fiduciary duties. 

4. Principal Factual Issues in Dispute 

Plaintiffs allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties and violated the 

Exchange Act by improperly misdating certain grants of Juniper stock options made to 

themselves and others. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants knew of and/or benefited from the 

misdated options and were unjustly enriched by their receipt thereof. Plaintiffs further allege 

that Juniper will suffer additional financial loss in the form of investigation and restatement 

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 3 of 7
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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW

-3- 3179497_2.DOC 

costs, increased financing costs, adverse tax consequences and revenue losses. Plaintiffs allege 

that no pre-suit demand is necessary because such a demand is futile. 

Nominal defendant Juniper denies plaintiffs’ allegations and maintains that plaintiffs do 

not have standing to assert claims on the Company’s behalf. The defendants deny plaintiffs’ 

allegations and maintain that they did not engage in any wrongdoing and did not breach any 

fiduciary duties. 

5. Principal Legal Issues in Dispute 

The parties assert that the principal legal issues currently in dispute are: (a) whether 

plaintiffs have standing to pursue this action on behalf of Juniper; (b) whether any of the claims 

asserted are barred by the applicable limitation periods; (c) whether the defendants breached 

their fiduciary duties or were unjustly enriched; (d) whether any defendant violated Sections 

14(a), 10(b) or 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; (e) whether Juniper was damaged 

as a result of material misrepresentations and omissions in Juniper’s SEC filings; (f) whether the 

defendants by virtue of their positions and actions had the power and influence to cause Juniper 

to engage in illegal conduct; and (g) whether Juniper is entitled to damages and/or equitable 

relief as a result of defendants’ alleged misconduct. 

6. Motions 

There are currently no pending motions. In the event settlement discussions fail, 

defendants anticipate filing motion(s) to dismiss. 

7. Amendment of Pleadings 

As referenced above, plaintiffs filed their Verified Consolidated Shareholders Derivative 

Complaint on April 11, 2007. No further amendments of the complaint are anticipated at this 

time. Defendants have not yet filed a responsive pleading due to the parties’ mutual agreement 

to stay the case pending settlement discussions. 

8. Evidence Preservation 

The parties have taken reasonable steps to preserve evidence relevant to the issues 

reasonably evident in this action. 

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 4 of 7
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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW

-4- 3179497_2.DOC 

9. Disclosures/Discovery 

By Order dated April 30, 2007 the Court stayed discovery in this action pending 

defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss. By stipulation and Order dated June 12, 2007, the 

Court temporarily stayed this action to allow the parties time to conduct settlement discussions. 

As referenced above, those settlement discussions are ongoing and the parties have a meeting 

scheduled for September 11, 2007. 

10. Related Cases 

On August 21, 2007, another identical derivative action was filed in the Northern District 

of California by plaintiff Arlee C. Gowen derivatively on behalf of Juniper, Gowen v. Kriens, et 

al., Case No. C 07-04298-RS. The plaintiff Arlee C. Gowen is represented by Coughlin Stoia 

Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP. The parties agree that this action should be deemed related to 

this action and transferred to the Honorable Judge Ware. The parties also agree that the Gowen 

case should be consolidated with this action. 

11. Relief Sought 

The plaintiffs seek both damages and equitable relief on behalf of Juniper. Specifically, 

the complaint seeks an accounting, a constructive trust over defendants’ stock options and 

proceeds derived therefrom, changes to corporate governance and internal controls, attorneys’ 

fees and other costs and disbursements in this action, and money damages on behalf of Juniper. 

The parties respectfully submit that a computation of damages in this matter is premature. 

12. Settlement and Alternative Dispute Resolution 

The parties respectfully submit that it is premature to submit this matter for Alternative 

Dispute Resolution. At this time, the parties still plan to conduct their own independent 

settlement discussions. 

13. Consent to Assignment to a United States Magistrate Judge for Trial / Other 

References 

The parties do not consent to assignment of this case to a United States Magistrate Judge 

and do not believe this case is suitable for to binding arbitration, special master, or the Judicial 

Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. 

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 5 of 7
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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW

-5- 3179497_2.DOC 

14. Disclosure of Non-party Interested Entities or Persons 

Defendants filed an updated disclosure statement pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-16 and 

Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on April 23, 2007. 

15. Remaining Items 

The parties respectfully submit that, in light of the discussion above regarding the parties’ 

intention to conduct settlement discussions, the remaining items that are normally included in 

Joint Case Management Statements (pursuant to the Standing Order for All Judges of the 

Northern District of California for Contents of Joint Case Management Statements) are 

premature at this time. 

The parties propose that the temporary stay in this case be continued to allow the parties 

additional time to conduct settlement discussions, and that the parties shall continue to meet and 

confer, and confer with the Court, to set a further case management conference in November 

2007 to revisit the status of the case. 

Dated: September 4, 2007 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 

NINA F. LOCKER 

STEVEN GUGGENHEIM 

JONI OSTLER 

 /s/ Joni Ostler 

JONI OSTLER 

Attorneys for Nominal Defendant Juniper 

Networks, Inc., and Defendants 

 I, Joni Ostler, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this Joint 

Case Management Statement. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that 

Travis E. Downs III has concurred in this filing.

Dated: September 4, 2007 COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & 

ROBBINS LLP 

TRAVIS E. DOWNS III 

BENNY C. GOODMAN III 

THOMAS G. WILHELM 

 /s/ Travis E. Downs III 

TRAVIS E. DOWNS III 

655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 

San Diego, CA 92101 

Telephone: 619/231-1058 

619/231-7423 (fax) 

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 6 of 7
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 

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – 

5:06-CV-03396-JW

-6- 3179497_2.DOC 

COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER 

 RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP 

SHAWN A. WILLIAMS 

MARIA V. MORRIS 

100 Pine Street, Suite 2600 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: 415/288-4545 

415/288-4534 (fax) 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Employer-Teamsters 

Local Nos. 175 & 505 Pension Trust Fund and 

Indiana State District Council of Laborers and 

HOD Carriers Pension Fund 

I, Joni Ostler, am the ECF user whose ID and password are being used to file this Joint 

Case Management Statement. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that 

Robin Winchester has concurred in this filing. 

Dated: September 4, 2007 SCHIFFRIN BARROWAY TOPAZ & 

KESSLER, LLP 

ERIC L. ZAGAR 

ROBIN WINCHESTER 

JAMES A. MARO 

 /s/ Robin Winchester 

ROBIN WINCHESTER 

280 King of Prussia Road 

Radnor, PA 19087 

Telephone: 610/667-7706 

610/667-7056 (fax) 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Timothy W. Hill 

* * * 

ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

THE HONORABLE JAMES WARE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION: 

 To facilitate the parties' settlement discussions, the Court continues the current STAY in 

the above entitled case. At this time, the Court exempts this case from the Court's ADR 

program as the parties are conducting their own independent settlement discussions. This is the 

parties' last continuance. The Court sets a Further Case Management Conference for November 

5, 2007 at 10 AM. The case is STAYED to November 5, 2007. The parties shall file a Joint 

Case Management Statement no later than ten (10) days before the date of the conference. 

Dated: September 11, 2007 _________________________________ 

 JAMES WARE 

 United States District Judge

Case 5:06-cv-03396-JW Document 83 Filed 09/11/07 Page 7 of 7