Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486-79/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re: JDS UNIPHASE CORPORATION

SECURITIES LITIGATION

 

This document relates to ALL ACTIONS

 /

No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL)

ORDER GRANTING JDSU’S REQUEST

FOR EXPEDITED BRIEFING ON

MOTION TO STRIKE

By letter brief filed April 30, 2007, JDSU requests expedited briefing on its motion to strike 

Lead Plaintiff’s supplemental disclosure of nine witnesses on April 13 and a tenth witness on April

25, 2007. Lead Plaintiff opposes the request for an expedited briefing schedule. For good cause

shown, the Court grants JDSU’s request for expedited briefing as follows:

JDSU shall file a brief on its motion to strike, not to exceed five pages, by its proposed date

of May 2, 2007, at 4 p.m.

Lead Plaintiff shall file a responsive brief, not to exceed five pages, by 4 p.m., May 3, 2007.

The Court will hold a hearing on JDSU’s motion to strike on May 7, 2007 at 3 p.m., if

necessary. The parties may appear by telephone by providing the courtroom deputy with a

telephone number where counsel may be reached, with the Court to initiate the telephone call if the

Court deems that a hearing is necessary.

The Court notes that Lead Plaintiff is correct in its interpretation of the Court’s standing Case

Management Order governing discovery as providing a mandatory deadline for disclosures without

precluding further supplementation pursuant to Rule 26(e)(1). If Lead Plaintiff learned of the newly

disclosed witnesses after the class notice was published, it would appear to have been appropriate for

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1118 Filed 05/01/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Lead Plaintiff to supplement its disclosures pursuant to Rule 26(e)(1) after the prescribed time for

disclosures had passed, particularly in light of the witnesses’ availability for deposition on the dates

requested by Defendants. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 1, 2007 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 1118 Filed 05/01/07 Page 2 of 2