UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MARY LOU BENNEK, Derivatively on ) Behalf of THE HOME DEPOT, INC.

E-FILED on 12/11/03 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Plaintiff, Plaintiff,

Case 2:14-cv JCC Document 16 Filed 05/20/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Case 1:08-cv EGS Document 19 Filed 12/12/08 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:13-cv DJC Document 44 Filed 12/03/13 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 5:04-cv JW Document 20 Filed 06/23/2004 Page 1 of 6 WECHSLER HARWOOD, LLP SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY, LLP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

Case4:09-cv CW Document42 FUedi 0/07/09 Pagel of 9

DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DATE FILED:21. Case 1:13-cv RMB Document 45 Filed 05/15/13 Page 1 of 6

CASE 0:15-cv JRT Document 17 Filed 02/12/16 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA INTRODUCTION

Page 1 of 13. Case 1: 05-cv-003-LY Document 23 Filed 01/2006 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION OS CV-923

Case 2:05-cv TJW Document 212 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 5

Case 1:08-cv LAK Document 78 Filed 01/09/2009 Page 1 of 9

GENERAL ORDER FOR LUCAS COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION. damages for alleged exposure to asbestos or asbestos-containing products; that many of the

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:03-cv LLS. Parties and Attorneys

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:09-cv DAB

Case 3:13-cv SV Document13 FUec101/22/14 Pagel of 7

Case 2:14-cv JCC Document 98 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:14-cv GBD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Docket Number: 1468 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS, INC. Thomas J. Stallings, Esquire Jack M. Stover, Esquire Charles I. Artz, Esquire CLOSED VS.

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:13-cv ER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs,

Case 1:17-cv JPO Document 47 Filed 05/23/18 Page 1 of 5

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA. vs. Case No: ORDER ESTABLISHING MOTION PRACTICE PROCEDURE

Case 4:17-cv YGR Document 19 Filed 04/26/17 Page 1 of 6

Case 3:16-md RS Document 72 Filed 06/15/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOCAL RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CALENDARING OF CIVIL CASES DISTRICT COURT DIVISION

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF STOCKHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, DIRECTING NOTICE, AND SCHEDULING FINAL APPROVAL HEARING

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETT S CLASS ACTION JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:17-cv VSB

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER #1

Case 4:04-cv RAS Document 41 Filed 12/09/2004 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

Case 1:12-cv RM-KMT Document 239 Filed 03/06/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case KG Doc 1750 Filed 12/18/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION NO.

Case 1:13-cv RCL Document 89 Filed 10/29/18 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case Doc 635 Filed 10/13/15 Entered 10/13/15 13:45:41 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

14 th JUDICIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT DIVISION GENERAL CIVIL RULES

Case 3:16-cv CRS-CHL Document 36 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 423

Case 2:06-cv R-CW Document 437 Filed 10/12/12 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:7705

It appearing that the civil actions listed on Schedule A, attached hereto -- which were

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SHARON COBB, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,,

U.S. District Court Western District Of Washington (Seattle) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:03-cv JCC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. ORDER This matter came before the Court on the Plaintiffs Motion for Modification of

Case4:12-cv JSW Document34 Filed09/19/14 Page1 of 11

U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri (LIVE) (St. Louis) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:11-cv AGF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

Case 1:08-cv LAK-GWG Document 472 Filed 12/14/12 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

LEWIS A. KAPLAN United States District Judge United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION ESSEX COUNTY. Docket No. ESX-L

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:12-cv AJN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. District of Oregon. Plaintiff(s), vs. Case No: 6:07-CV-6149-HO. Defendant(s). Civil Case Assignment Order

Case: 5:14-cv JRA Doc #: 29 Filed: 01/28/15 1 of 6. PageID #: 284 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 4:05-cv Y Document 86 Filed 04/30/07 Page 1 of 7 PageID 789 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION

Case 1:13-cv MMS Document 54 Filed 06/18/15 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

Case 3:16-cv DRH Document 4 Filed 07/05/16 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #39 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/11/ :32 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 58 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/11/2016 EXHIBIT 2

shl Doc 36 Filed 05/15/12 Entered 05/15/12 17:26:47 Main Document Pg 1 of 5

Plaintiff, - against - 09 Civ (DAB) ORDER. Plaintiff, - against - 09 Civ (DAB) ORDER. Plaintiff,

CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION CALENDAR 98, COURTROOM 3001 CHICAGO, IL (312)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. Case No. 3:16-cv DRH Master Docket In Re: Just For Men Mass Tort Litigation

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. Case No. CIV M ORDER

smb Doc 308 Filed 08/12/16 Entered 08/12/16 17:49:16 Main Document Pg 1 of 5

U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:07-cv JCC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND SETTLEMENT OF DERIVATIVE ACTIONS AND OF SETTLEMENT HEARING TO ALL HOLDERS OF BARNES & NOBLE, INC. STOCK ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR T

Case M:06-cv VRW Document 557 Filed 02/06/2009 Page 1 of 7

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:18-cv RWS

Case 3:14-cv JAG Document 193 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 4730 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:08-cv PAC

Case 2:17-cv GAM Document 56 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

COMPLEX CONSTRUCTION CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. It is, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, unless later modified by Order of this Court,

considering appointing, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Effective September 1, 2018 TABLE OF RULES II. TRANSFER TO ARBITRATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF ARBITRATOR

Case 2:15-cv DN-BCW Document 111 Filed 11/04/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

being preempted by the court's criminal calendar.

RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE NOTICE

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 58 Filed: 11/10/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:314

RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 6:4. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TRIAL

Case 1:15-cv LTS Document 29 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 7

Plaintiff, Defendant. for Denbury Resources, Inc. ("Denbury" or "Defendant") shares pursuant to the merger of

Transcription:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WILLIAM PANZINI and EDNA PANZINI, Derivatively on behalf of GENZYME Civil Action No. 09-12170-GAO CORPORATION, Plaintiffs, v. HENRI A. TERMEER, MICHAEL S. WYZGA RICHARD A. MOSCICKI, DOUGLAS A. BERTHIAUME, GAIL K. BOUDREAUX, CONNIE MACK III, RICHARD F. SYRON, ROBERT J. CARPENTER, CHARLES L. COONEY, VICTOR J. DZAU, MARK R. BAMFORTH, ZOLTAN CSIMMA, THOMAS J. DESROSIER, DAVID MEEKER, ALAN E. SMITH, SANDFORD D. SMITH, PETER WIRTH, GEORGES GEMAYEL AND EARL M. COLLIER, JR., Defendants, and GENZYME CORPORATION, Nominal Defendant. JACK R. BALL, Derivatively on behalf of GENZYME CORPORATION, Civil Action No. 09-12198-GAO Plaintiff, v. HENRI A. TERMEER, MICHAEL S. WYZGA RICHARD A. MOSCICKI, DOUGLAS A. BERTHIAUME, GAIL K. BOUDREAUX, CONNIE MACK III, RICHARD F. SYRON, ROBERT J. CARPENTER, CHARLES L. COONEY, VICTOR J. DZAU, MARK R. BAMFORTH, ZOLTAN CSIMMA, THOMAS J. DESROSIER, DAVID MEEKER, ALAN E. SMITH, SANDFORD D. SMITH, PETER WIRTH, GEORGES GEMAYEL AND EARL M. COLLIER, JR., Defendants, and GENZYME CORPORATION, Nominal Defendant.

ORDER February 19, 2010 O TOOLE, D.J. In light of the parties stipulation, the following Order is entered: A. CONSOLIDATION 1. The following above-captioned actions are hereby consolidated for all purposes, including pretrial proceedings, trial and appeal: Abbreviated Case Name Case Number Date Filed William Panzini and Edna Panzini v. Termeer, et al. Case No. 1:09-cv-12170-GAO December 22, 2009 Jack R. Ball v. Termeer, et al. Case No. 1:09-CV-12198-GAO December 28, 2009 2. The caption of these consolidated actions shall be In re Genzyme Corp. Derivative Litigation and the files of these consolidated actions shall be maintained in one file under Master File No. 1:09-cv-12170-GAO (the Consolidated Action. The above-captioned actions and any other shareholder derivative action on behalf of Genzyme Corporation filed in, or transferred to, this Court arising out of or relating to the same facts and claims as those contained in the above captioned actions, are consolidated for all purposes under the Consolidated Action. 3. Every pleading filed in the Consolidated Action, or in any separate action included herein, shall bear the following caption: 2

4. When a pleading is intended to be applicable to all actions governed by this Order, the words All Actions shall appear immediately after the words This Document Relates To: in the caption set out above. When a pleading is intended to be applicable to only some, but not all, of the consolidated actions, this Court s docket number for each individual action to which the pleading is intended to be applicable and the abbreviated case name of said action shall appear immediately after the words This Document Relates To: in the caption described above. 5. A Master Docket and a Master File hereby are established for the above consolidated proceedings and for all other related cases filed in or transferred to this Court. 6. When a case that properly belongs as part of the Consolidated Action is filed in this Court or transferred to this Court from another court, the Clerk of this Court shall: a. place a copy of this Order in the separate file for such action; b. mail to the attorneys for the plaintiff(s in the newly-filed or transferred case a copy of this Order and direct that this Order be served upon or mailed to any new defendant(s or their counsel in the newly-filed or transferred case; and c. make an appropriate entry on the Docket. This Court requests the assistance of counsel in calling to the attention of the Clerk of this Court the filing or transfer of any case that properly might be consolidated as of the filing of the parties Stipulation. 3

B. PENDING, SUBSEQUENTLY FILED, AND TRANSFERRED RELATED ACTIONS 1. Each and every putative action filed in, or transferred to, this Court arising out of or relating to the same facts and claims as those claims alleged in this Consolidated Action shall constitute a case related to the Consolidated Action ( Related Action or the Related Actions. 2. Each Related Action shall be governed by the terms of this Order and shall be consolidated for all purposes with the Consolidated Action. C. PREVIOUSLY FILED PAPERS 1. All papers previously filed and served to date in any of the cases consolidated herein are deemed to be and are hereby adopted as part of the record in the Consolidated Action. D. SERVICE OF PROCESS 1. Within ten (10 days of the entry of this Order, the defendants counsel shall appear for and be deemed to have accepted service on behalf of all defendants not already served, without waiving any defense, including defenses based upon personal or subject matter jurisdiction. No defendant shall have any obligation to answer, move or otherwise respond to the existing complaints pending the filing of a Consolidated Amended Complaint and the expiration of the stay entered pursuant to Section 7.43 of the MBCA. E. ORGANIZATION OF LEAD PLAINTIFF, LEAD COUNSEL AND LIAISON COUNSEL 1. Plaintiffs Mr. and Mrs. Panzini and Mr. Ball shall be appointed Lead Plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action. 4

2. The law firm of Barroway Topaz Kessler Meltzer & Check, LLP shall be appointed Lead Counsel for the plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action. 3. Lead Counsel shall have authority to speak for the plaintiffs in matters regarding pretrial and trial procedure and settlement negotiations, and shall make all work assignments in such manner as to facilitate the orderly and efficient prosecution of this litigation and to avoid duplicative or unproductive effort. 4. Lead Counsel shall be responsible for coordination of all activities and appearances on behalf of the plaintiffs and for the dissemination of notices and orders of this Court. No motion, request for discovery or other pretrial proceedings shall be initiated or filed by the plaintiffs except through Lead Counsel. 5. Lead Counsel shall also be available and responsible for communications to and from this Court. Lead Counsel shall be responsible for the creation and maintenance of a master service list of all parties and their respective counsel. 6. The law firm of Gilman and Pastor, LLP shall be appointed as Liaison Counsel. Liaison Counsel shall have authority to receive orders, notices, correspondence, and telephone calls from the Court on behalf of all plaintiffs and shall be responsible for the preparation and transmission of copies of such orders, notices, correspondence, and memoranda of such telephone calls to the plaintiffs counsel. 7. The defendants counsel may rely upon all agreements made with Lead Counsel or other duly authorized representatives of the plaintiffs and such agreements shall be binding on the plaintiffs. 5

F. SCHEDULE 1. Pursuant to Section 7.43 of the MBCA, proceedings in the Consolidated Action shall be stayed sixty (60 days from the day this Order is entered. At the end of the sixty (60 day stay period, the defendants shall file with the Court a report indicating the status of the Special Committee s investigation. 2. Lead Plaintiffs shall file and serve a Consolidated Complaint thirty (30 days after the stay is lifted. The defendants need not respond to any of the pre-existing complaints. The Consolidated Complaint shall not constitute an amended complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a(1(A or a similar rule or law. 3. The defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Consolidated Complaint, including by making a motion to dismiss pursuant to Section 7.44 of the MBCA, no later than forty-five (45 days after the day on which Lead Plaintiffs file their Consolidated Complaint. 4. In the event that the defendants file and serve any motion directed at the Consolidated Complaint, Lead Plaintiffs shall file and serve their Opposition no later than thirty (30 days after the day on which the defendants filed their response, unless Lead Plaintiffs move for an order to modify the discovery stay imposed by Section 7.44(d of the MBCA in connection with a motion by the defendants pursuant to Section 7.44 of the MBCA. In the event that Lead Plaintiffs move for such an order authorizing specified discovery, the parties shall confer in good faith to propose an alternative schedule for the Court s approval, including, if necessary, a briefing schedule for any motion Lead Plaintiffs might file seeking discovery. 5. The defendants may file a reply brief no later than twenty (20 days after the day on which Lead Plaintiffs file their Opposition. 6

6. Nothing herein shall prejudice the defendants rights to seek and obtain a further stay at the end of the stay period, and nothing herein shall prejudice the plaintiffs rights to oppose such additional stay. It is SO ORDERED. /s/ George A. O Toole, Jr. United States District Judge 7