1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND 

EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ERIC JAEGER and 

JERRY A. SHANAHAN, 

Defendants. 

No. 01:07-00039-SM 

REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT

DEFENDANT ERIC JAEGER’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN LIGHT 

OF NEW AUTHORITY

 Defendant Eric Jaeger hereby moves for summary judgment as to the allegation that he 

aided and abetted a “scheme” under Rule 10b-5(a) & (c) with respect to the Centricity, iPolicy, 

and Everest Broadband transactions, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rule 7.2(b). In 

support of this Motion, Mr. Jaeger states as follows: 

1. The Court previously dismissed the vast majority of the Securities and Exchange 

Commission’s (“SEC”) case against Mr. Jaeger, including the dismissal of five of seven claims 

against Mr. Jaeger and every claim under which the SEC sought to hold him liable for Enterasys 

Network Inc.’s (“Enterasys”) allegedly false GAAP financial statements. 

2. The SEC lacks admissible evidence sufficient to get to a jury on the small portion 

of Count III that the Court sustained, namely that Mr. Jaeger allegedly aided and abetted a 

“scheme” under Rule 10b-5(a) & (c) with respect to the three transactions at issue, i.e., Centricity, 

iPolicy, and Everest Broadband. 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 302 Filed 06/25/12 Page 1 of 4
2 

3. The grounds for this Motion are set forth in greater detail in the accompanying 

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment In Light of New Authority, 

filed herewith. 

REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT

 Mr. Jaeger respectfully requests a brief oral argument pursuant to L.R. 7.1(d). Mr. Jaeger 

makes this request because he believes that oral argument may assist the Court’s consideration of 

this Motion and he would appreciate the opportunity for counsel to address any issues raised by, 

or questions posed by, the Court. As the Court has already reduced the case to two narrow 

claims, and also has articulated the legal standards governing those two claims, Mr. Jaeger is 

prepared to limit his argument, if one is permitted, to the fifteen (15) minutes called for by L.R. 

7.1(d). 

 WHEREFORE, Mr. Jaeger respectfully requests that the Court: 

(1) Grant his Motion for Summary Judgment, and enter Final Judgment for him and 

against Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission as to claim that he aided 

and abetted a “scheme” under Rule 10b-5(a) & (c); 

(2) Award Mr. Jaeger his reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses; and 

(3) Award any other relief as is fair and just. 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 302 Filed 06/25/12 Page 2 of 4
3 

Dated: June 25, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 

ERIC JAEGER, 

By his attorneys, 

 /s/ Jonathan A. Shapiro_________________

 Jonathan A. Shapiro 

Elizabeth H. Skey (admitted pro hac vice) 

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING 

HALE AND DORR LLP 

950 Page Mill Road 

Palo Alto, CA 94304 

(650) 858-6000 

Jeffrey B. Rudman (admitted pro hac vice) 

James W. Prendergast (admitted pro hac vice) 

Peter A. Spaeth (admitted pro hac vice) 

James T. Lux (admitted pro hac vice) 

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING 

HALE AND DORR LLP 

60 State Street 

Boston, MA 02109 

(617) 526-6000 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 302 Filed 06/25/12 Page 3 of 4
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, James Lux, hereby certify that Mr. Jaeger’s Motion for Summary Judgment will be sent 

electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing and 

paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-registered participants on June 25, 2012. 

Dated: June 25, 2012 /s/ James Lux 

 James Lux

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 302 Filed 06/25/12 Page 4 of 4