Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-02029/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-02029-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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- Plaintiff’s Proposed Order re Schedule for 

SLC 

C 08-02029 CRB 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

MARY E. BARBOUR AS TRUSTEE 

FOR THE MARY E. BARBOUR 

FAMILY TRUST ONE, Derivatively 

On Behalf of BROCADE 

COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, 

INC., 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

GREGORY L. REYES, DAVID L. 

HOUSE, MICHAEL KLAYKO, 

RICHARD DERANLEAU, KUMAR 

MALAVALLI ANTONIO CANOVA, 

MICHAEL J. BYRD, STEPHANIE 

JENSEN, NEIL DEMPSEY, SANJAY 

VASWANI, L. WILLIAM KRAUSE, 

ROBERT R. WALKER, GLENN C. 

JONES, MICHAEL J. ROSE, SETH D. 

NEIMAN, NICHOLAS G. MOORE, 

CHRISTOPHER B. PAISLEY, 

WILLIAM K. O’BRIEN, LARRY 

SONSINI, MARK LESLIE, TYLER 

WALL, RENATO A. DIPENTIMA, 

JOHN W. GERDELMAN, KPMG, 

LLP, WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH 

& ROSATI, P.C. AND DOES 1-25, 

inclusive, 

Defendants, 

Case No. C 08-02029 CRB

PLAINTIFF MARY E. 

BARBOUR’S [PROPOSED] 

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE 

FOR SPECIAL LITIGATION 

COMMITTEE 

Dept.: 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

DENIED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:08-cv-02029-CRB Document 51 Filed 06/30/08 Page 1 of 3
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- Plaintiff’s Proposed Order re Schedule for 

SLC 

C 08-02029 CRB 

 and

BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS 

SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware 

corporation, 

Nominal Defendant. 

WHEREAS, on June 12, 2008 the Court held a Case Management 

Conference in the above-captioned matter; 

WHEREAS, the Court heard argument from counsel for Plaintiff and counsel 

for Brocade’s Special Litigation Committee as to how the action should proceed 

over the next few months; 

WHEREAS, counsel for the SLC advised the Court that the SLC has reached 

a conclusion to pursue various claims against 11 prospective defendants relating to 

the backdating of stock options at Brocade; 

WHEREAS, counsel for the SLC advised the Court that letters would be 

mailed to the 11 defendants on June 13, 2008 advising the defendants that the SLC 

had authorized claims to be pursued against such individuals, identifying the 

claims, and providing the defendants until June 27, 2008 to provide a response, if 

any, to the SLC; 

WHEREAS, the SLC will finalize its Resolution and report by July 11, 2008, 

after receiving responses (if any) from the 11 defendants; 

WHEREAS, the SLC has indicated its intent to meet with Plaintiff’s counsel 

to discuss the prosecution of the claims and Plaintiff’s counsel’s role in the 

prosecution of such claims, should the parties be able to reach an agreement; 

WHEREAS, the Court has been informed that, on June 13, 2008, the SLC’s 

counsel sent letters to the prospective defendants advising them that the SLC has 

decided to assert claims against them on behalf of Brocade and that the prospective 

defendants could make any written submissions by June 27, 2008; 

Case 3:08-cv-02029-CRB Document 51 Filed 06/30/08 Page 2 of 3
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- Plaintiff’s Proposed Order re Schedule for 

SLC 

C 08-02029 CRB 

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 

1. The Special Litigation Committee (“SLC”) shall finalize its conclusions, 

Resolution, and report by July 11, 2008. A copy of the Resolution and 

report shall be provided to the Court and Plaintiff’s counsel the same day. 

2. Plaintiff may file any motion she wishes, including any motions relating 

to advancement, indemnification, or repayment of legal fees by the 

individual defendants, but no hearing on such motions shall occur prior to 

mid-August 2008. The parties shall work cooperatively together to 

schedule a mutually convenient briefing schedule and hearing date. 

3. Discovery is stayed until further notice.

4. A further Status Conference is set for July 18, 2008. At the conference, if 

Plaintiff’s counsel and counsel for the SLC have not reached a mutually 

agreeable resolution regarding prosecution of claims, and if Plaintiff 

desires to challenge the independence, good faith, or conclusions reached 

by the SLC, the Court will entertain argument from counsel about 

scheduling matters and discovery pertaining to any such challenge.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 

THE HON. CHARLES R. BREYER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

June 30, 2008

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

DENIED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:08-cv-02029-CRB Document 51 Filed 06/30/08 Page 3 of 3