Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-05344/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-05344-5/pdf.json

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

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTINE KUEHBECK,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 GENESIS MICROCHIP INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 02-05344 JSW

NOTICE OF TENTATIVE

RULING AND QUESTIONS FOR

HEARING

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE

NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE RULING AND QUESTIONS FOR THE

HEARING SCHEDULED ON DECEMBER 8, 2006:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ memoranda of points and authorities and, thus, does

not wish to hear the parties reargue matters addressed in those pleadings. If the parties intend to

rely on authorities not cited in their briefs, they are ORDERED to notify the Court and opposing

counsel of these authorities reasonably in advance of the hearing and to make copies available at

the hearing. If the parties submit such additional authorities, they are ORDERED to submit the

citations to the authorities only, without argument or additional briefing. C.f. N.D. Civil Local

Rule 7-3(d). The parties will be given the opportunity at oral argument to explain their reliance

on such authority. The parties shall not file written responses to the questions posed in this

notice.

The Court tentatively GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for final approval of the Settlement

and Class Action and application for award of attorney’s fees and reimbursement of expenses.

Case 3:02-cv-05344-JSW Document 102 Filed 12/01/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

The parties each shall have ten (10) minutes to address the following questions:

1. The Court has reviewed the Supplemental Finkel declaration. If, prior to the

hearing, the parties receive any belated objections or additional exclusions, they

shall bring them to the attention of the Court on or before December 7, 2006.

2. Assuming the Court grants Plaintiff’s request for a fee award of 25% of the

settlement fund, and if the Court grants the request for the$15,000 award to

Plaintiff and grants the request for all costs and expenses, is the Court correct

that total attorneys fees to be awarded would amount to $ 422,597.10 (1.75M -

15,000 - 42,881.98 - 1,729.72 = 1,690,388.4/4 = $422,597.10)?

a. Is the Court correct, based on the lack of a written objection, that the

Defendants do not object to the fees and expenses sought by Lead

Plaintiff and her counsel?

3. Are there any other issues the parties wish to address?

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 1, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:02-cv-05344-JSW Document 102 Filed 12/01/06 Page 2 of 2