Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01339/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01339-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Securities Violation

---

MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP

Lee H. Rubin (SBN 141331)

Shirish Gupta (SBN 205584)

Two Palo Alto Square, Suite 300 

Palo Alto, California 94306

Telephone: (650) 331-2000

Facsimile: (650) 331-2060

sgupta@mayerbrownrowe.com

Attorneys for Defendant Refco F/X 

Associates, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA—OAKLAND DIVISION

Michael Edward Ross, 

Plaintiff

v. 

Refco F/X Associates, LLC,

Defendant 

Case No. C 05-01339 CW

ORDER GRANTING IN PART STIPULATION 

TO VACATE THE ORDER SETTING THE 

INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE 

Hon. Claudia Wilken

CMC: August 12, 2005
Whereas, Plaintiff Michael Edward Ross (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint in the above 

captioned matter on April 1, 2005; and,

Whereas, defendant Refco F/X Associates, LLC (“Refco”) has waived service of the 

summons in response to a June 28, 2005, request under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d), with the 

consequence that Refco has through August 29, 2005 to serve its response to the Compla int; and,

Whereas, upon the filing of the Complaint, the Court entered an Order Setting the Initial 

Case Management Conference. The CMC is currently set for August 12, 2005, two weeks 

before Refco is required to respond to the Complaint; and,

Whereas, the Complaint includes claims for fraud under the federal securities laws, which 

are governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “PSLRA”); and,

Whereas, Refco anticipates filing a Motion to Dismiss that will trigger the PSLRA’s 

mandatory discovery stay. See Securities Exchange Act of 1934 § 21D(b)(3)(B),

Therefore, the parties hereby stipulate that the Court should vacate the dates set forth in 

its Order setting the Initial CMC and refrain from resetting the dates until after the resolution of 

Defendant’s anticipated Motion to Dismiss. 

Dated: July 21, 2005 /s/ Michael Edward Ross 

Pro Se Plaintiff Michael Edward Ross

Dated: July 21, 2005 MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW LLP

By: /s/ Shirish Gupta 

Shirish Gupta

Attorneys for Defendant Refco F/X Associates, LLC

Filer’s Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B), Shirish Gupta hereby 

attests that the signatory’s concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained.
2

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, the Order Setting the Initial Case Management 

Conference, including all dates set forth therein, is hereby vacated. The Case Management 

Conference is continued to October 7, 2005, at 10:00 a.m. Any motion to dismiss shall also be 

noticed for October 7, 2005.

Dated: July 22, 2005 /s/ CLAUDIA WILKEN

______________________________ 

Hon. Judge Claudia Wilken 

United States District Court Judge