Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-05157/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-05157-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
Cause of Action: 12:22 Securities Fraud

---

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 REGARDING EXTENSION OF PLEADING SCHEDULE 

SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY, LLP 

Eric L. Zagar 

280 King of Prussia Road 

Radnor, Pennsylvania 19087 

Telephone: (610) 667-7706 

Facsimile: (610) 667-7056 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER 

RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP 

Shawn A. Williams 

100 Pine Street, Suite 2600 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 288-4545 

Facsimile: (415) 288-4535 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

_______________________________________ 

In re DITECH NETWORKS, INC., 

This Document Related to: All Actions 

Master Case No. C-06-05157 JF 

STIPULATION REGARDING 

EXTENSION OF PLEADING 

SCHEDULE 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants, through their 

respective counsel herein, as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs shall have a three-week extension of time from December 22, 2006 

through and including January 12, 2007, within which to file their consolidated complaint, which 

will supersede all existing complaints filed in these actions. Defendants need not respond to any 

of the pre-existing complaints. 

2. Defendants’ time to respond to the consolidated complaint, whether by pleading, 

answer, motion or otherwise, shall be no later than forty-five (45) days following the service on 

Defendants of the consolidated complaints. 

**E-filed 1/18/07**

Case 5:06-cv-05157-JF Document 27 Filed 01/18/07 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 - 

STIPULATION REGARDING EXTENSION OF PLEADING SCHEDULE

3. Plaintiffs’ opposition to any motion to dismiss filed by Defendants shall be no later 

than forty-five (45) days following the service of any motion to dismiss. 

4. Defendants’ reply papers, if any, shall be served no later than thirty (30) days after 

Plaintiffs’ opposition. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: December 27, 2006 LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN 

& ROBBINS LLP 

 /s/ Shawn A. Williams 

Shawn A. Williams 

Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs

And 

SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY, LLP 

Eric L. Zagar 

Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Dated: December 27, 2006 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

 

 /s/ Diane E. Pritchard 

 Diane E. Pritchard 

 425 Market Street 

 San Francisco, CA 94105-2485 

 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 

 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

Case 5:06-cv-05157-JF Document 27 Filed 01/18/07 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 - 

STIPULATION REGARDING EXTENSION OF PLEADING SCHEDULE

I, Eric L. Zagar, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 

Stipulation Regarding Extension of Pleading Schedule. In compliance with General Order 45, 

X.B., I hereby attest that Diane E. Pritchard, attorney for Defendants, has concurred in this filing. 

Dated: December 27, 2006 SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY, LLP 

 /s/ Eric L. Zagar ____________________________ 

Eric L. Zagar 

Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 

* * * 

ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: __________________, 2006 

 Honorable Jeremy Fogel 

 United States District Judge 

January 18

Case 5:06-cv-05157-JF Document 27 Filed 01/18/07 Page 3 of 3