Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-00222/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-00222-10/pdf.json

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

---

No. C-09-0222-CW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING THE FILING OF LEAD 

PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 

LIONEL Z. GLANCY (S.B.#134180) 

MICHAEL GOLDBERG (S.B.#196382) 

1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311 

Los Angeles, California 90067 

Telephone: (310) 201-9150 

Facsimile: (310) 201-9160 

E-mail: info@glancylaw.com

Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT CALIFORNIA 

______________________________ 

 ) 

IN RE RACKABLE SYSTEMS, INC.) Case No. C-09-0222-CW 

SECURITIES LITIGATION ) 

______________________________ ) CLASS ACTION 

 ) 

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) 

ALL ACTIONS ) 

______________________________ ) 

JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING THE FILING 

OF LEAD PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Case 4:09-cv-00222-CW Document 55 Filed 04/05/10 Page 1 of 4
No. C-09-0222-CW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING THE FILING AND 

BREIFING OF PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

1 

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 February 3, 2010, Lead Plaintiff Elroy Whittaker and named plaintiffs 

Gerald Dull and Vincent Fusco (“Plaintiffs”) filed the Second Amended Complaint for 

Violations of the Federal Securities Laws (“Second Amended Complaint”); 

 WHEREAS, on February 4, 2010, Lead Plaintiff Elroy Whittaker filed a motion to 

withdraw as Lead Plaintiff and substitute plaintiffs Gerald Dull and Vincent Fusco as the new 

Lead Plaintiffs; 

WHEREAS, Defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss the Second Amended 

Complaint; 

 WHEREAS, on February 23, 2010, the Court entered a Stipulation and Order Regarding 

Scheduling Matters (see Docket Entry No. 52) (the “February 23 Scheduling Order”) providing 

(i) that Defendants shall file their motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint on or 

before April 2, 2010, (ii) that Lead Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss within 28 days of the filing of the motion to dismiss, i.e, on or before April 30, 2010, 

and (iii) that Defendants shall file their reply in support of the motion to dismiss within 14 days 

of the filing of the Lead Plaintiffs’ opposition, i.e., on or before May 14, 2010; 

WHEREAS, on March 22, 2010, the Court entered an Order Granting the Motion Of 

Lead Plaintiff Elroy Whittaker to Withdraw and Substitute New Lead Plaintiffs (see Docket 

Entry No. 53), whereby the Court appointed plaintiffs Gerald Dull and Vincent Fusco as lead 

plaintiffs in the above-captioned action, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §78u-4(a)(3)(B); 

 WHEREAS, in light of the Court’s March 22, 2010 Order, the newly appointed Lead 

Plaintiffs have prepared and will, contemporaneously with the filing of this Joint Stipulation, 

file a Supplemental Second Amended Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, which 

supplements the operative complaint to give effect to the Court’s March 22, 2010, Order; 

WHEREAS, the parties have conferred and agree that: (i) Lead Plaintiffs’ Supplemental 

Second Amended Complaint shall be the operative complaint in this Action (ii); Defendants 

will file a motion to dismiss the Supplemental Second Amended Complaint within five days of 

Case 4:09-cv-00222-CW Document 55 Filed 04/05/10 Page 2 of 4
No. C-09-0222-CW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING THE FILING AND 

BREIFING OF PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

2 

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

the Court’s entry of Lead Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Second Amended Complaint, and Lead 

Plaintiffs correspondingly will be allowed five additional days, i.e., 33 days, in which to file 

their opposition to the motion to dismiss; (iii) Defendants shall file their reply to Lead 

Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to dismiss within 14 days of the filing of Lead Plaintiffs’ 

opposition; and (iv), all references to the “Second Amended Complaint” in the February 23 

Scheduling Order shall be deemed references to the “Supplemental Second Amended 

Complaint.” 

 NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned parties hereby stipulate and agree, and 

respectfully request that the Court enter an order, as follows: 

1. Lead Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Second Amended Complaint shall be the 

operative complaint in this Action. 

2. Defendants shall file a motion to dismiss Lead Plaintiffs’ Supplemental 

Second Amended Complaint within five days of the Court’s entry of the Supplemental Second 

Amended Complaint. 

3. Lead Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss the Supplemental Second Amended Complaint within 33 days of the filing of the 

motion to dismiss. 

4. Defendants shall file their reply in support of their motion to dismiss 

within 14 days of the filing of Lead Plaintiffs’ opposition to the motion to dismiss. 

5. All references in the February 23 Scheduling Order to the “Second 

Amended Complaint” shall be deemed references to the “Supplemental Second Amended 

Complaint.” 

 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: April 2, 2010 GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 

 By: /s/ Michael Goldberg 

 Michael Goldberg (SB#188669) 

 1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311 

 Los Angeles, CA, 90067 

 Tel: (310) 201-9150 

Case 4:09-cv-00222-CW Document 55 Filed 04/05/10 Page 3 of 4
No. C-09-0222-CW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING THE FILING AND 

BREIFING OF PLAINTIFFS’ SUPPLEMENTAL SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

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

 Fax: (310) 201-9160 

 

 Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class 

 

Dated: April 2, 2010 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

By: /s/ Pete Snow 

Pete Snow 

Meredith N. Landy 

Attorneys for Defendants Rackable Systems, 

Inc., Thomas K. Barton and Madhu 

Ranganathan 

I, Michael Goldberg, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file 

this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding the Filing and Briefing of Plaintiffs’ 

Supplemental Second Amended Complaint. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I 

hereby attest that Meredith N. Landy has concurred in this filing. 

By: /s/ Michael Goldberg 

 Michael Goldberg 

O R D E R

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: April 5, 2010 

 The Honorable Claudia Wilken 

 United States District Judge 

Case 4:09-cv-00222-CW Document 55 Filed 04/05/10 Page 4 of 4