Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06347/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06347-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Stockholders Suits

---

1 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

CASE NO. CV 07-6347 MHP 

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 

SULLIVAN

& 

CROMWELL LLP

Robert A. Sacks (SBN 150146) 

(sacksr@sullcrom.com) 

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 

1888 Century Park East 

Los Angeles, California 90067 

Telephone: (310) 712-6600 

Facsimile: (310) 712-8800 

Brendan P. Cullen (SBN 194057) 

(cullenb@sullcrom.com) 

Scott C. Hall (SBN 232492) 

(halls@sullcrom.com) 

Sverker K. Högberg (SBN 244640) 

(hogbergs@sullcrom.com) 

Nathaniel L. Green (SBN 260568) 

(greenn@sullcrom.com) 

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 

1870 Embarcadero Road 

Palo Alto, California 94303 

Telephone: (650) 461-5600 

Facsimile: (650) 461-5700 

Attorneys for Defendants VERIFONE HOLDINGS, INC., 

DOUGLAS G. BERGERON, JAMES C. CASTLE, LESLIE G. 

DENEND, ALEX W. (PETE) HART, ROBERT B. HENSKE, 

EITAN RAFF, CHARLES R. RINEHART, COLLIN E. ROCHE, 

CRAIG A. BONDY and BARRY ZWARENSTEIN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

IN RE VERIFONE HOLDINGS, INC. 

SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE 

LITIGATION 

------------------------------------------------------- 

This Document Relates To: No. CV 07 6347 

(King); No. CV 08 1132 (Hilborn); No. CV 

08 1133 (Patel); No. CV 08 1301 (Lemmond) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. CV 07-6347 MHP 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN 

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND 

CONSOLIDATED AMENDED 

SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE 

COMPLAINT 

Judge: The Hon. Marilyn H. Patel 

Courtroom: 15 

Case 3:07-cv-06347-MHP Document 77 Filed 01/11/10 Page 1 of 6
 2 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

CASE NO. CV 07-6347 MHP 

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 

SULLIVAN

& 

CROMWELL LLP

WHEREAS, on November 7, 2008, Plaintiffs and Defendants mutually agreed and 

stipulated in their Stipulation and Proposed Order Regarding Briefing Schedule in Response to 

Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint (“Briefing Stipulation and Order”) 

that the resources of the parties and the Court were best conserved, and the interests of judicial economy 

were best served, by deferring the filing by Defendants of motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Consolidated 

Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint (“FAC”) on the ground that the FAC failed to state claims 

against the Defendants until after the parties had briefed, and the Court had resolved, nominal defendant 

VeriFone Holdings, Inc.’s (“VeriFone”) motion to dismiss the FAC on the ground that Plaintiffs lack 

standing to sue derivatively on VeriFone’s behalf because Plaintiffs failed to make a pre-suit demand on 

VeriFone’s Board of Directors; 

WHEREAS, on November 19, 2008, the Court entered Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ 

Briefing Stipulation and Order; 

WHEREAS, on October 19, 2009, Plaintiff and Defendants filed a Joint Supplemental 

Case Management Conference Statement, which provided that Lead Plaintiff, Charles King, would file 

his Second Consolidated Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) on or before December 10, 2009 and 

Defendants would file their motion to dismiss on or before January 25, 2010; 

WHEREAS, Lead Plaintiff filed his Complaint on December 10, 2009; 

WHEREAS, VeriFone intends to move to dismiss the Complaint on the ground that Lead 

Plaintiff lacks standing to sue on VeriFone’s behalf because Plaintiff failed to make a pre-suit demand 

on VeriFone’s Board of Directors (the “VeriFone Standing Motion”); 

WHEREAS, nominal defendant VeriFone and the individual defendants, Douglas G. 

Bergeron, James C. Castle, Leslie G. Denend, Alex W. (Pete) Hart, Robert B. Henske, Eitan Raff, 

Charles R. Rinehart, Collin E. Roche, Craig A. Bondy, Barry Zwarenstein, and Paul Periolat 

(collectively, the “Individual Defendants”) also intend to move to dismiss the Complaint on the grounds 

that the Complaint fails to state claims against each of them or otherwise is subject to dismissal even if 

Plaintiffs have standing to assert their claims (the “Separate Dismissal Motions”); 

WHEREAS, the parties believe the resources of the parties and the Court are best 

conserved, and the interests of judicial economy are best served, by deferring the filing of the Separate 

Case 3:07-cv-06347-MHP Document 77 Filed 01/11/10 Page 2 of 6
 3 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

CASE NO. CV 07-6347 MHP 

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 

SULLIVAN

& 

CROMWELL LLP

Dismissal Motions until the threshold issue of Lead Plaintiff’s standing to file and maintain a lawsuit on 

behalf of VeriFone is resolved by the Court. 

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, between Lead 

Plaintiff, VeriFone, and the Individual Defendants, by and through their respective counsel, that: 

1. The VeriFone Standing Motion: Pursuant to the October 19, 2009 Joint 

Supplemental Case Management Conference Statement, VeriFone will file its motion to dismiss the 

Complaint on the ground that Lead Plaintiff does not have standing to pursue this action on the 

Company’s behalf on or before January 25, 2010, such date being forty-five (45) days from the filing of 

the Complaint on December 10, 2009. Lead Plaintiff shall file his opposition to VeriFone’s motion to 

dismiss on or before March 10, 2010. VeriFone shall file any reply to Lead Plaintiff’s opposition on or 

before March 25, 2010. 

2. The Separate Dismissal Motions: Other than as set forth in Section 1, above, the 

Individual Defendants and VeriFone shall have no obligation to move to dismiss or otherwise respond to 

the Complaint on January 25, 2010. Following the Court’s resolution of the VeriFone Standing Motion, 

the parties shall meet and confer regarding a schedule for any necessary response to the Complaint. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: January 7, 2010 /s/ Brendan P. Cullen 

Brendan P. Cullen (SBN 194057) 

Scott C. Hall (SBN 232492) 

Sverker K. Hogberg (SBN 244640) 

Nathaniel L. Green (SBN 260568) 

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 

1870 Embarcadero Road 

Palo Alto, California 94303-3308 

Telephone: (650) 461-5600 

Facsimile: (650) 461-5700 

Robert A. Sacks (SBN 150146) 

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 

1888 Century Park East 

Los Angeles, California 90067-1725 

Telephone: (310) 712-6640 

Facsimile: (310) 712-8800

Attorneys for VeriFone and Individual Defendants 

Douglas G. Bergeron, James C. Castle, Leslie G. 

Denend, Alex W. (Pete) Hart, Robert B. Henske, 

Eitan Raff, Charles R. Rinehart, Collin E. Roche, 

Craig A. Bondy and Barry Zwarenstein 

Case 3:07-cv-06347-MHP Document 77 Filed 01/11/10 Page 3 of 6
 4 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

CASE NO. CV 07-6347 MHP 

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 

SULLIVAN

& 

CROMWELL LLP

DATED: January 7, 2010 /s/ Patrick D. Robbins 

Patrick D. Robbins (SBN 152288) 

SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP 

525 Market Street, Suite 1500 

San Francisco, California 94105-2723 

Telephone: (415) 616-1210 

Facsimile: (415) 616-1199 

Attorney for Individual Defendant Paul Periolat 

DATED: January 7, 2010 /s/ Arthur L. Shingler 

Arthur L. Shingler III (SBN 181719) 

SCOTT + SCOTT LLP 

600 B Street, Suite 1500 

San Diego, California 92101 

Telephone: (619) 233-4565 

Facsimile: (619) 233-0508 

David R. Scott 

SCOTT + SCOTT LLP 

108 Norwich Avenue, P.O. Box 192 

Colchester, Connecticut 06415 

Telephone: (860) 537-5537 

Facsimile: (860) 537-4432 

Attorneys for Lead Plaintiff Charles R. King 

Case 3:07-cv-06347-MHP Document 77 Filed 01/11/10 Page 4 of 6
 5 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

CASE NO. CV 07-6347 MHP 

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 

SULLIVAN

& 

CROMWELL LLP

I, Brendan P. Cullen, am the ECF user whose User ID and Password are being used to 

file this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN 

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND CONSOLIDATED AMENDED SHAREHOLDER 

DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B, I hereby attest that the other 

signatories listed have concurred in this filing. 

Dated: January 7, 2010 

/s/ Brendan P Cullen

Brendan P. Cullen (SBN 194057) 

Scott C. Hall (SBN 232492) 

Sverker K. Hogberg (SBN 244640) 

Nathaniel L. Green (SBN 260568) 

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 

1870 Embarcadero Road 

Palo Alto, California 94303-3308 

Telephone: (650) 461-5600 

Facsimile: (650) 461-5700 

Robert A. Sacks (CSB 150146) 

SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 

1888 Century Park East 

Los Angeles, California 90067-1725 

Telephone: (310) 712-6640 

Facsimile: (310) 712-8800

Attorneys for VeriFone and the VeriFone 

Individual Defendants 

Case 3:07-cv-06347-MHP Document 77 Filed 01/11/10 Page 5 of 6
 6 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

CASE NO. CV 07-6347 MHP 

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 

SULLIVAN

& 

CROMWELL LLP

ORDER 

THE FOREGOING STIPULATION 

IS APPROVED AND IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 THE HONORABLE MARILYN H. PATEL 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

1/8/2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:07-cv-06347-MHP Document 77 Filed 01/11/10 Page 6 of 6