Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-00341/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-00341-1/pdf.json

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

---

4:19-cv-00341-HSG JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO FURTHER STAY PROCEEDINGS 

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 

COOLEY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

COOLEY LLP 

JOHN C. DWYER, Bar No. 136533 (dwyerjc@cooley.com) 

PATRICK E. GIBBS, Bar No. 183174 (pgibbs@cooley.com) 

CLAIRE A. MCCORMACK, Bar No. 241806 

(cmccormack@cooley.com) 

3175 Hanover Street 

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1130 

Telephone: +1 650 843 5000 

Facsimile: +1 650 843 7400 

Attorneys for Defendants 

NVIDIA CORPORATION, JENSEN 

HUANG, COLETTE M. KRESS, 

ROBERT K. BURGESS, TENCH COXE, 

PERSIS S. DRELL, JAMES C. GAITHER, 

DAWN HUDSON, HARVEY C. JONES, 

MICHEAEL G. MCCAFFERY, MARK L. PERRY, 

 A. BROOKE SEAWELL, and MARK A. STEVENS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

In re: NVIDIA CORPORATION 

CONSOLIDATED DERIVATIVE 

LITIGATION 

This Document Relates to: 

ALL ACTIONS 

Case No. 4:19-cv-00341-HSG 

JOINT STIPULATION AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER TO FURTHER

STAY PROCEEDINGS 

[CIVIL L.R. 7-12] 

Related Case No.: 4:18-cv-07669-HSG 

Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 

Courtroom: 2 

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-12, plaintiffs Sanghyep Han, Yuju Yang, and The Booth 

Family Trust (“Plaintiffs”) and defendants NVIDIA Corporation (“NVIDIA”), Jensen Huang, 

Colette M. Kress, Robert K. Burgess, Tench Coxe, Persis S. Drell, James C. Gaither, Dawn Hudson, 

Harvey C. Jones, Michael G. McCaffrey, Mark L. Perry, A. Brooke Seawell, and Mark A. Stevens, 

(the “Individual Defendants,” together with NVIDIA, the “Defendants,” and together with 

Case 4:19-cv-00341-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/27/20 Page 1 of 6
4:19-cv-00341-HSG

2 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO FURTHER STAY PROCEEDINGS 

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 

COOLEY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

Plaintiffs, the “Parties”), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as 

follows: 

RECITALS 

WHEREAS, on January 18, 2019, Plaintiff Sanghyep Han filed a shareholder derivative 

action on behalf of nominal defendant NVIDIA against the Individual Defendants, alleging 

violations of Section 10(b), 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange 

Act”), SEC Rules 10b-5 and 14a-9, and breaches of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and waste 

of corporate assets, captioned Han v. Huang, et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00341 (the “Han Action”); 

WHEREAS, on February 12, 2019, Plaintiff Yuju Yang filed a shareholder derivative action 

on behalf of NVIDIA against the Individual Defendants, asserting substantially similar factual 

allegations and claims as the Han Action, captioned Yang v. Huang, et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00766 

(the “Yang Action”); 

WHEREAS, on February 19, 2019, Plaintiff The Booth Family Trust filed a shareholder 

derivative action on behalf of NVIDIA against the Individual Defendants asserting substantially 

similar factual allegations and many of the same claims as the Han and Yang Actions, captioned 

The Booth Family Trust v. Huang, et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00876 (the “Booth Action”); 

WHEREAS, on March 4, 2019, the Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted a stipulation 

consolidating two federal securities class actions, Iron Workers Local 580 Joint Funds v. NVIDIA 

Corporation, et al., Case No. 4:18-cv-07669-HSG and Oto v. NVIDIA Corporation, et al., Case 

No. 4:18-cv-07783-HSG (the “Consolidated Class Action”) that are currently pending against 

NVIDIA and two of its officers. The Consolidated Class Action is captioned In re NVIDIA 

Corporation Securities Litigation, alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange 

Act and SEC Rule 10b-5, and is currently pending before this Court; 

WHEREAS, on March 12, 2019, the Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted Defendants’ 

Administrative Motion to Relate and Consolidate Cases and to Appoint Co-Lead Counsel, thereby 

relating the Han, Yang, and Booth Actions to the Consolidated Class Action, consolidating the Han, 

Yang, and Booth Actions under Case No. 4:19-cv-00341-HSG, reassigning them to the Hon. 

Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., and entitling the consolidated derivative action In re NVIDIA Corporation 

Case 4:19-cv-00341-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/27/20 Page 2 of 6
4:19-cv-00341-HSG

3 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO FURTHER STAY PROCEEDINGS 

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 

COOLEY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

Consolidated Derivative Litigation (the “Consolidated Derivative Action”) (ECF No. 19); 

WHEREAS, on March 27, 2019, the Court approved the Parties’ joint stipulation to stay 

the Consolidated Derivative Action pending resolution of any motion to dismiss filed in the 

Consolidated Class Action; 

WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted-in-part and 

denied-in part, with leave to amend, a motion to dismiss filed by NVIDIA in the Consolidated Class 

Action; 

WHEREAS, it is expected that an amended complaint will be filed in the Consolidated 

Class Action; 

WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred concerning the most efficient manner in 

which to litigate the Consolidated Derivative Action during the pendency of the Consolidated Class 

Action; 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that the resolution of the Consolidated Class Action will 

inform the manner in which the Consolidated Derivative Action proceeds; 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that in the interests of judicial economy and preservation of 

the Court’s and Parties’ resources, all proceedings in the Consolidated Derivative Action should be 

stayed in their entirety until after the entry of any order(s) on a motion to dismiss an amended 

complaint in the Consolidated Class Action; 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that Defendants need not answer, move, or otherwise respond 

to the pending complaints in the Consolidated Derivative Action, or any subsequent complaint filed 

in the Consolidated Derivative Action, until after the entry of any order(s) on a motion to dismiss 

the Consolidated Class Action; and 

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that within 30 days of entry of any order(s) on a motion to 

dismiss in the Consolidated Class Action, the Parties will meet and confer in good faith and propose 

either a further stay or a schedule in the Consolidated Derivative Action for Defendants’ response(s) 

to the operative complaint(s), which will be subject to approval by the Court. 

STIPULATION 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the Parties 

Case 4:19-cv-00341-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/27/20 Page 3 of 6
4:19-cv-00341-HSG

4 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO FURTHER STAY PROCEEDINGS 

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 

COOLEY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

hereto, through their undersigned counsel, as follows: 

1. The Consolidated Derivative Action remains stayed in its entirety until the entry of 

any order on a motion to dismiss an amended complaint filed in the Consolidated Class Action or 

until plaintiffs in the Consolidated Class Action indicate their intention not to file an amended 

complaint. 

2. Within 30 days of entry of any order on a motion to dismiss any amended complaint 

filed in the Consolidated Class Action, or within 30 days of the plaintiffs in the Consolidated Class 

Action indicating their intention not to file an amended complaint, the Parties will meet and confer 

in good faith and propose either a further stay or a schedule in the Consolidated Derivative Action, 

including a deadline for Defendants to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the operative 

complaint(s) in the Consolidated Derivative Action. 

3. Defendants need not answer, move, or otherwise respond to the pending complaints 

in the Consolidated Derivative Action, or any subsequent complaint filed in the Consolidated 

Derivative Action, until a response date is set and/or approved by the Court following the Court 

lifting the stay. 

4. Defendants shall promptly notify Plaintiffs of any related derivative actions. 

5. Defendants shall promptly notify Plaintiffs if a related derivative action is not stayed 

for a similar or longer duration than the Consolidated Derivative Action. 

6. If Defendants produce documents or written discovery to plaintiffs in any related 

derivative action during the pendency of the stay, Defendants agree to provide a copy to Plaintiffs 

in the Consolidated Derivative Action. 

7. Plaintiffs have the option to terminate the stay if a related derivative action is not 

stayed for a similar or longer duration by giving 30 days’ notice via email to counsel for Defendants. 

8. If the Parties in the Consolidated Class Action, or in any related derivative actions, 

choose to pursue mediation or engage in formal settlement talks, Defendants agree to include 

Plaintiffs in the Consolidated Derivative Action in the mediation or formal settlement talks. In the 

event plaintiffs in the Consolidated Class Action or any related derivative actions object to 

including Plaintiffs in the Consolidate Derivative Action in the mediation or formal settlement 

Case 4:19-cv-00341-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/27/20 Page 4 of 6
4:19-cv-00341-HSG

5 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO FURTHER STAY PROCEEDINGS 

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 

COOLEY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

talks, Defendants agree to mediate with Plaintiffs in the Consolidated Derivative Action at or about 

the same time. 

9. The Parties do not seek this stay of proceedings for the purpose of delay, and the 

unopposed stay will not have an effect on any pre-trial dates as the Court has yet to schedule the 

dates. 

10. The Parties are not waiving any rights, claims, or defenses of any kind except as 

expressly stated herein, including the right to pursue formal discovery once this case is no longer 

stayed and/or to file any motion any Party deems appropriate, and the Parties reserve the right to 

seek further extensions of time as circumstances may warrant, subject to the Court’s approval. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD. 

Dated: March 26, 2020 COOLEY LLP 

By: /s/ Claire A. McCormack 

John C. Dwyer 

Patrick E. Gibbs 

Claire A. McCormack 

Attorneys for Defendants 

NVIDIA CORPORATION, JENSEN 

HUANG, COLETTE M. KRESS, 

ROBERT K. BURGESS, TENCH COXE, 

PERSIS S. DRELL, JAMES C. GAITHER, 

DAWN HUDSON, HARVEY C. JONES, 

MICHEAEL G. MCCAFFERY, MARK L. 

PERRY, A. BROOKE SEAWELL, and MARK 

A. STEVENS 

Dated: March 26, 2020 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 

By: /s/ Laurence M. Rosen 

Laurence M. Rosen 

355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 

Los Angeles, CA 90071 

Telephone: (213) 785-2610 

Facsimile: (213) 226-4684 

Email: LROSEN@ROSENLEGAL.COM 

Case 4:19-cv-00341-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/27/20 Page 5 of 6
4:19-cv-00341-HSG

6 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

TO FURTHER STAY PROCEEDINGS 

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 

COOLEY LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

PALO ALTO

 THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C. 

Timothy Brown 

240 Townsend Square 

Oyster Bay, NY 11771 

Telephone: (516) 922-5427 

Facsimile: (516) 344-6204 

Email: 

TBROWN@THEBROWNLAWFIRM.NET 

WEISSLAW LLP 

David C. Katz 

1500 Broadway, 16th Floor 

New York, NY 10036 

Telephone: (212) 682-3025 

Facsimile: (212) 682-3010 

Email: dkatz@weisslawllp.com 

Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs 

* * * 

ORDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

 Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 

 United States District Court Judge 

 

Case 4:19-cv-00341-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/27/20 Page 6 of 6