Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-03650/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-03650-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jay Lapine
Defendant
Securities And Exchange Commission
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JAY LAPINE,

Defendant. /

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff, 

 v.

CHARLES McCALL,

Defendant. /

No. C 01-03650 WHA

Consolidated with:

No. C 03-02603 WHA

ORDER RE REQUEST

TO ENLARGE TIME

The SEC and defendant Jay Lapine have filed a stipulated request to modify discovery

and filing deadlines in this matter on the grounds that they have reached a settlement

agreement “in principle, subject to approval by members of the Commission” (Br. at 2). The

parties must clarify whether their settlement agreement has been actually finalized but for the

Commission’s approval. If the details of the settlement agreement have not yet been finalized 

Case 3:01-cv-03650-WHA Document 97 Filed 02/01/10 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

and submitted to the Commission for approval, good cause to modify the case schedule has not

been shown.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 1, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:01-cv-03650-WHA Document 97 Filed 02/01/10 Page 2 of 2