Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04886/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04886-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 28:1441 - Petition for Removal: SEC Act

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

 Civil Case No. C-06-4886 (JSW) 

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 

Tammy Albarrán, SB #215605 

COVINGTON & BURLING LLP 

One Front Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 591-6000 

Facsimile: (415) 591-6091 

talbarran@cov.com 

Linda C. Goldstein (pro hac vice) 

Simon G. Brandler 

COVINGTON & BURLING LLP 

620 Eighth Avenue 

New York, NY 10018-1405 

Telephone: (212) 841-1000 

Facsimile: (212) 841-1010 

lgoldstein@cov.com 

 

Attorneys for Defendants 

COWEN & COMPANY, SG COWEN SECURITIES 

CORPORATION and COWEN & COMPANY, LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

CHARLES T. MADDEN, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

 -vCOWEN & COMPANY, a New York limited 

partnership; SG COWEN SECURITIES 

CORPORATION, a New York corporation; 

COWEN & COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware 

limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 

50, 

Defendants. 

 Civil Case No.: C-06-4886 (JSW) 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE

Date: April 16, 2010 

Time: 9:00 a.m. 

Courtroom: 11, 19th Floor 

Judge: Hon. Jeffrey S. White 

 

Case 3:06-cv-04886-JSW Document 77 Filed 02/18/10 Page 1 of 3 Case3:06-cv-04886-JSW Document76 Filed02/17/10 Page1 of 4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

 Civil Case No. C-06-4886 (JSW) 

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 

WHEREAS, on December 18, 2009, this Court entered an order setting forth the 

schedule for briefing Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (the 

“Order”), and provided that should “counsel wish to modify the schedule, they shall submit a 

stipulation and proposed order setting forth an alternative briefing schedule”;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their Motion to Remand on January 29, 2010 and 

Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss and Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand on 

February 12, 2010, in accordance with the Order; 

WHEREAS, the Order further provides that Plaintiffs shall file their reply brief 

by February 26, 2010, Defendants shall file their reply brief by March 5, 2010, and oral 

argument shall be held on April 16, 2010; 

WHEREAS, the Order provides Plaintiffs two weeks in which to prepare their 

reply brief and Defendants only one week in which to prepare their reply brief; 

The parties hereby stipulate as follows: 

The date for filing the reply brief on Defendants’ motion to dismiss is adjourned 

from March 5, 2010 until March 12, 2010. All other dates set forth in the Order shall remain the 

same. 

DATED: February 17, 2010 COVINGTON & BURLING LLP 

 By: /s/ Tammy Albarrán 

 Tammy Albarrán 

Attorneys for Defendants 

DATED: February 17, 2010 BOROWSKY & HAYES LLP 

 By: /s/ Christopher J. Hayes 

 Christopher J. Hayes 

 100 Spear Street, Suite 1640 

 San Francisco, CA 94105-1571 

 Telephone: (415) 896-6800 

 Facsimile: (415) 896-0600 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Case 3:06-cv-04886-JSW Document 77 Filed 02/18/10 Page 2 of 3 Case3:06-cv-04886-JSW Document76 Filed02/17/10 Page2 of 4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

MODIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 

 Civil Case No. C-06-4886 (JSW) 

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 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: ___________________ By: 

 Hon. Jeffrey S. White 

 United States District Judge 

Case3:06-cv-04886-JSW Document76 Filed02/17/10 Page4 of 4

Plaintiffs were provided two weeks to file an opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss and a 

reply in support of their motion to remand. Defendants merely need to prepare a reply brief and so the Court DENIES the parties' request. This Order is without prejudice to the parties submitting a revised stipulation to alter the 

briefing schedule upon a showing of good cause. February 18, 2010

Case 3:06-cv-04886-JSW Document 77 Filed 02/18/10 Page 3 of 3