DOCSLIB.ORG

Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP 100 Park Avenue New York, N.Y

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP 100 Park Avenue New York, N.Y Case 1:11-cv-10230-MLW Document 454 Filed 08/16/18 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ARKANSAS TEACHER RETIREMENT SYSTEM, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, No. 11-cv-10230-MLW vs. STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Defendant. ____________________________________________/ ARNOLD HENRIQUEZ, MICHAEL T. COHN, WILLIAM R. TAYLOR, RICHARD A. SUTHERLAND, and those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, No. 11-cv-12049-MLW vs. STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Defendant. ____________________________________________/ THE ANDOVER COMPANIES EMPLOYEE SAVINGS AND PROFIT SHARING PLAN, on Behalf of itself, and JAMES PEHOUSHEK- STANGELAND and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, No. 12-cv-11698-MLW vs. STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Defendant. ____________________________________________/ SPECIAL MASTER’S RESPONSE TO COURT’S AUGUST 10, 2018 ORDER Case 1:11-cv-10230-MLW Document 454 Filed 08/16/18 Page 2 of 4 On August 10, 2018, the Court directed the Special Master and the Lawyers to update the court on various issues pertaining to the status of these proceedings. Dkt. # 445. Specifically, the Court ordered that, by August 16, 2018, the Master (a) confer with the Lawyers and propose a schedule for the Master’s response to the objections to the Report and any replies; and (b) file for the public record any documents added to the Record by the Master on August 6, 2018.1 Dkt. 445, ¶¶ 5(a) & (b). The Special Master has conferred with counsel as to a mutually-agreeable timeline proceeding forward.2 The Master proposes the following set forth below. I. The Special Master’s Compliance with 5(a) of the Court’s Order Proposing a Schedule for Responding to the Objections and Replies thereto. In light of the ongoing discussions to propose a joint resolution for the Court’s consideration, the Special Master proposes delaying the preparation of his response to the objections until those discussions have been completed, or alternatively, proven to be productive, at the latest, by September 6, 2018 (4 weeks from the date of the August 9, 2018 hearing before the Court). When negotiations are complete or have reached their end, by September 6, the Special Master will present a recommended global resolution, if reached, to the Court for its consideration in moving forward with its review of the Master’s Report and Recommendations. 1 On August 3, 2018, the Master filed, under seal, the Special Master’s First Submission of Documents to Supplement the Record. Dkt. #415. The same day, the Master submitted a disc to the Court containing the first set of supplemental documents to the Court. Those documents, with two redactions made on page 81 (LBS020590) and pages 286-89 (LBS031599-602) to remove personal information of third parties unrelated to the issues presented in the Master’s investigation, are herein attached to this pleading and now available to the public. 2 At the time of filing, Labaton agrees to, and Keller Rohrback and Zuckerman Spaeder taken no position on, the timeline proposed in Section I, infra. Other counsel had not yet responded. Thornton Law Firm objects to the proposed timeline and suggests instead that the Special Master respond to the objections by September 7, 2018, and that Customer Class Counsel reply by September 28, 3018. 2 Case 1:11-cv-10230-MLW Document 454 Filed 08/16/18 Page 3 of 4 If, however, the parties have not yet reached an agreement for joint resolution by September 6, 2018, but believe that global resolution is imminent, such that it may be reached in an additional period of time not to exceed seven (7) days, the Special Master agrees that he will file with the Court a joint motion requesting such additional time (not to exceed 7 days) to complete the resolution process. Because a proposed joint resolution among the parties and the Special Master may limit, and potentially obviate, the Special Master’s obligation to respond to the Law Firms’ objections, the Special Master proposes that the “clock” for responding to the Law Firms’ objections not run until the later of the following: (i) the date, prior to September 6, when the efforts at negotiating a joint resolution prove unsuccessful; (ii) the Court definitively rules, either rejecting or accepting the proposed resolution; or (iii) the Court provides additional direction to the parties. From the date of this determination, the Special Master requests eight (8) weeks to file his response to the objections and any additional documents relevant to that response to further supplement the Record. Pursuant to the Parties’ Protocol (Dkt. # 259) and the Court’s August 10 Order, any documents in the Special Master’s response that are not already in the Record will be filed under seal and released publicly with any appropriate redactions within 14 days of that filing, after the parties have had an opportunity to confer about the appropriate redactions. Thornton has proposed that Customer Class Counsel have twenty-one (21) days3 to file a reply to the Master’s response to the objections. 3 As indicated above, Thornton proposes that the Customer Class Counsel file a reply by September 28, 2018, three weeks, or 21 days, after its proposed deadline for the Special Master’s response to the objections. 3 Case 1:11-cv-10230-MLW Document 454 Filed 08/16/18 Page 4 of 4 II. The Special Master’s Compliance with ¶ 5(b) Concerning the Status of Documents Filed in the Master’s First Submission of Documents to Supplement the Record. Per paragraph 5(b) of the Court’s Order, the Special Master herein files the documents added to the record in the Special Master’s First Submission of Documents to Supplement the Record filed with the Court, under seal, on August 3, 2018.4 So far, the only requests for redactions, to which the Special Master is agreeable, is the redaction of Tim Herron’s daughter’s resume and law school transcript. Dated: August 16, 2018 Respectfully submitted, SPECIAL MASTER HONORABLE GERALD E. ROSEN (RETIRED), By his attorneys, /s/ William F. Sinnott William F. Sinnott (BBO #547423) Elizabeth J. McEvoy (BBO #683191) BARRETT & SINGAL, P.C. One Beacon Street, Suite 1320 Boston, MA 02108 Telephone: (617) 720-5090 Facsimile: (617) 720-5092 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this foregoing document was filed electronically on August 16, 2018 and thereby delivered by electronic means to all registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (“NEF”). Paper copies were sent to any person identified in the NEF as a non-registered participant. /s/ William F. Sinnott William F. Sinnott 4 Access to an electronic database containing these documents was given to the Law Firms, through their counsel, contemporaneously with serving those documents on the Court. 4 Case 1:11-cv-10230-MLW Document 454-1 Filed 08/16/18 Page 1 of 3 Keller, Christopher J. </O-GOODKIN LABATON RUDOFF From: SUCHAROW/OU-FIRST ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=KELLERC > Sent: Monday, March 5, 2007 11:12 AM To: ’[email protected]’ Cc: ’[email protected]’; ’[email protected]’; Rado, Andrei <[email protected]>; Chan, Cindy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Its yours. I didn’t know you had interest it local counsel positions. We may be filing another one in TX, in addition to l. and I will let you lknow as we get closcr to filing. Jnst so you, since there will be a lead plaintiff contest under the PSLRA, there is no gaurm~tee we (or you) will be actively litigating the case. Chris Sent from my- BlackBerry Wireless Handheld ..... Onginal Message ..... From: Kamran Mashayekh <[email protected]> To: Keller, Christopher J. Cc: Damon Chargois <[email protected]>; Tim Herron <tim,~,hkhlaw.cona> Sent: Moil Mar 05 11:57:24 2007 Subject: RE: Christopher: We sent you an email and left a message with your assistam this morning that our finn (Chargois, mashayekh and herron) is interesled in being local on the case and wishes to explore what that would enlail in lhis case. ff we still have a shot for being considered, please let us know how best to proceed. Thank you k From: Keller, Christopher J. [._m_..a__~l_t__o.’_.__c..k__~l__l.~_r.(~_.!l__a..b__~l_tl)_~,_c_..o___m_] Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 10:55 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Kamran Mashayekh; BeN, Eric J. Subject: Re: Thanks. I think we will be ok finding an alternate firm I wanted to give you guys first shot at it. CONFIDENTIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER LBS017411 Case 1:11-cv-10230-MLW Document 454-1 Filed 08/16/18 Page 2 of 3 Sent from my- BlackBerry.- Wireless Handheld ..... Original Message ..... From: Laurence Tien <[email protected]> To: Keller, Christopher J. Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Belfi, Eric J. Sent: Mon Mar 05 11:16:03 2007 Subject: RE: Chris, My firm probably would uot be iuterested in beiug local counsel for the ~~ case but tlulnk you for thinking of us. ff Kamran’s firm is not interested, then I can probably find some good attorneys for you. Laurence Original Message ..... > From: Keller, Christopher J. [mailto:ckeller~tlabaton.com] > Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 10:58 PM > To: Laurence Tien > Cc: [email protected]; Belfi, Eric J. > Subject: FW: > Laurence: I am glad to hear that things are moving forward. > Wc arc hea~_~T into options backdating cases and arc lead > counsel in over 1/3 of all 10b cases involving options > backdating. In fact, we are planning on filing a new case > against ~, which is based in Houston.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FALL 2008 Columbia University in the City of New York Co
    FALL 2008 Columbia University in the City of New York CO 435 West 116th Street, Box A-2 L UM New York, NY 10027 BI A L RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED A W S C HO O L M ag azine www.law.columbia.edu/alumni fall 2008 BREAKING THE CODE NEW FACULTY MEMBER MICHAEL GRAETZ HAS AN INNOVATIVE PLAN FOR REVAMPING AMERICA’s TAX CODE TALKINGTALKING TETELECLECOM: TIM WU CHATS WITH JEFFREY TOOBIN SCOTUS ANALYSIS FROM BLASI, BRIFFAULT, GREENAWALT, HAMBURGER, AND PERSILY Opportunity The Future of Diversity and Opportunity in Higher dean Columbia Law School Magazine David M. Schizer is published three times annually for alumni and friends of associate dean Education: A National Columbia Law School by the for development and Office of Development and alumni relations Alumni Relations. Forum on Innovation and Bruno M. Santonocito Opinions expressed in Columbia Law Collaboration executive director School Magazine do not necessarily of communications reflect the views of Columbia Law and public affairs School or Columbia University. Elizabeth Schmalz This magazine is printed December 3-5, 2008 guest editor on FSC certified paper. Matthew J.X. Malady editorial director James Vescovi assistant editor Mary Johnson Change of address information should be sent to: copy editors Lauren Pavlakovich, Columbia Law School Joy Y. Wang 435 West 116 Street, Box A-2 New York, NY 10027 During the first week in December, design and art direction Attn: Office of Alumni Relations Empire Design Studio Alumni Office university presidents, provosts, and photography 212-854-2680 Peter Freed, Robyn Twomey, Magazine Notices Eric van den Brulle, Jon Roemer 212-854-2650 academic innovators will gather for David Yellen [email protected] an historic conference focused on new printing Copyright 2008, Columbia Maar Printing Service, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • CJEB Annual Report 2004-2005
    CENTER ON JAPANESE ECONOMY AND BUSINESS Annual Report 2004–2005 CENTER ON JAPANESE ECONOMY AND BUSINESS Annual Report 2004–2005 The preeminent academic center on Japanese business and economics Established at Columbia Business School in 1986 under the direction of Professor Hugh Patrick, the Center on Japanese Economy and Business (CJEB) promotes knowledge and understanding of Japanese business and economics in an international context. The Center not only is a research organization but also is widely recognized for its programs, which provide prominent speakers from the public and private sectors and a forum for collaboration and reflection on Japan, the United States and the global economy. In support of its mission, CJEB organizes and supports research projects, workshops, symposia, conferences, training and curricular development programs, scholarly and professional exchanges, and library and computer- based resource initiatives. Core faculty members are Japan specialists drawn from Columbia’s Business School, Law School, Economics Department, and School of International and Public Affairs. Funding is provided by corporate sponsors, foundations, and University sources. TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR AND ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR RESEARCH . 1 RESEARCH Japan: Another Economic Recovery, New Political Terrain, by Hugh Patrick . 2 The Research Community . 20 Major Projects . 27 EVENTS Symposia . 28 Lectures . 31 Alternative Investments Roundtables in Tokyo . 31 Weatherhead East Asian Institute Brown Bag Series . 32 PUBLICATIONS Working Papers and Occasional Paper Series . 33 Event Reports . 34 EXCHANGE OF IDEAS Seminars and Discussion Groups . 35 Faculty Exchange . 36 Student Outreach . 37 Fellowship and Scholarship Programs . 37 CJEB CONNECTIONS APEC Study Center of Columbia University . 38 Pacific Trade and Development (PAFTAD) Conference Series .
    [Show full text]
  • COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL Magazine Fall 2010 22
    From the Dean In May, Columbia Law School bid farewell to the Class of 2010. Despite a challenging market, job placement for the J.D. class exceeded 98 percent (including graduates with deferred start dates), and clerkship There was a time when people and why two situations that at led lives very much like the lives first seem different are actu- placement for the 2010 term increased of their grandparents—living ally similar. Our grad uates in the same place, doing the know how to parachute into a 52 percent over the previous year. On August 16, same sort of work, and using situation and become experts the same technology. Your in it very quickly, and how to the Law School greeted the J.D. Class of experience over the coming exert leadership in every sector decades, though, will be quite of human activity all over the 2013, which was selected from a record 9,012 different. Every few years, the world. These same qualities of world will be transformed in mind will serve you well in a applicants, and an incoming LL.M. class that important ways. This means constantly changing world. that change is a fact of life, and Even as the world evolves, was chosen from a record 1,697 applications. you will need to adapt to it. our core values and principles This is a bit unsettling, I know, must endure. We need to pair An excerpt of Dean David M. Schizer’s but it can also be invigorating. intellectual flexibility with You will have to keep learning moral steadfastness.
    [Show full text]
  • In Memory of Harvey J. Goldschmid
    Washington University Law Review Volume 93 Issue 2 New Directions for Corporate and Securities Litigation 2015 In Memory of Harvey J. Goldschmid Joel Seligman University of Rochester Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Joel Seligman, In Memory of Harvey J. Goldschmid, 93 WASH. U. L. REV. 249 (2015). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol93/iss2/6 This Tribute is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. IN MEMORY OF HARVEY J. GOLDSCHMID† JOEL SELIGMAN Today we bid farewell to Harvey Goldschmid, a sweet and gentle man, a friend whom so many of us trusted, a powerful and influential voice in corporate and securities law, a person whose career was as effective both as a scholar and teacher and as a government official as I have ever known. Harvey also was my closest friend in academia. Our friendship began literally in the first hours of my professional career. It is particularly appropriate we do so at an ILEP conference. Ed Labaton took the lead in organizing the first and all subsequent ILEP conferences. Harvey and I, along with Jim Cox, worked with Ed on the first conference, and Harvey and Jim stayed deeply involved during the next 21 years of ILEP events. From the initial focus on Class Actions at the Crossroads to the conference today, ILEP has made a difference in articulating thoughtful programs, including outstanding speakers on pivotal issues of investor protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Harvey Goldschmid Interview
    Securities and Exchange Commission Historical Society Interview with Harvey Goldschmid Conducted on June 17, 2013 by Robert Colby RC: This is an interview with Harvey Goldschmid for the SEC Historical Society's virtual museum and archive of the history of financial regulation. I'm Robert Colby. Today is June 17th, and today's interview is being conducted in Mr. Goldschmid's office at the Columbia Law School in New York City. Mr. Goldschmid, thank you for being with us today. HG: It is a pleasure to be with you. RC: Where are you from originally? HG: New York. Bronx, New York is where I grew up, in a working-class part of town. RC: Growing up, did you have any interest in law? HG: I did, although I'm not at all sure where it came from. There were no lawyers in my family. On the other hand, I was a history buff and read a lot of history and political science. Lawyers kept popping up everywhere in those works. By the time I was twelve, so far as my memory can reconstruct, I was pretty sure I wanted to be a lawyer. RC: So you did your undergraduate work at Columbia. Interview with Harvey Goldschmid, June 17, 2013 2 HG: I've been at Columbia forever. RC: (Laughter.) Were there courses or mentors that guided you? HG: Yes. I was a history major. Richard Hofstadter was probably the most important influence on me, although ironically he almost dissuaded me from becoming a lawyer. I did a major writing project for him.
    [Show full text]
  • David Becker Interview
    Securities and Exchange Commission Historical Society Interview with David Becker Conducted on May 21, 2015 by William Thomas WT: This is an interview with David Becker for the SEC Historical Society’s virtual museum and archive of the history of financial regulation. I’m William Thomas. The date is May 21st, 2015, and we’re at Och-Ziff Capital Management Group in New York City. Thanks very much for agreeing to speak with us. We have, I think, quite a bit to talk about with your two different stints as general counsel at the SEC. We always like to do a little bit of biographical background first. I understand you’re from here, from New York City? DB: Originally, yes. Basically, I was brought up in the area. Then we moved to Manhattan and I was here in high school, college, and law school, driving a cab a little in between. WT: And you did an undergraduate degree at Columbia, as well as your law degree? DB: I did. WT: What did you study for your undergrad? DB: Political science; what they call “Government” at Columbia. WT: Did you have any notion when you were doing your law degree that you’d end up in the corporate and securities area of law? Interview with David Becker, May 21, 2015 2 DB: No, I was generally clueless about most things in law school. WT: Then after that, I see you clerked first for the U.S. Court of Appeals D.C. Circuit, and then for a retired Supreme Court Justice. Could you tell me a little bit about those experiences? DB: I clerked for Circuit Judge Harold Leventhal, who was a brilliant man, and the clerkship was a wonderful, extremely intellectually challenging experience for a novice right out of law school.
    [Show full text]
  • Revolving Elites: the Unexplored Risk of Capturing the SEC
    Revolving Elites: The Unexplored Risk of Capturing the SEC JAMES D. COX* & RANDALL S. THOMAS** Fears have abounded for years that the sweet spot for capture of regula- tory agencies is the ªrevolving doorº whereby civil servants migrate from their roles as regulators to private industry. Recent scholarship on this topic has examined whether America's watchdog for securities markets, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), is hobbled by the long-standing practices of its enforcement staff exiting their jobs at the Commission and migrating to lucrative private sector employment where they represent those they once regulated. The research to date has been inconclusive on whether staff revolving door practices have weakened the SEC's verve. In this Article, we offer a different perspective on the source of risks of the SEC's capture as a consequence of revolving door practices. We focus on all the key divisions of the SEC, not just its Division of Enforcement, and we exam- ine the individuals who lead the staff and set its agenda. We ®nd that the SEC's day-to-day work is highly collaborative and staff output is subject to review at multiple levels. These characteristics greatly reduce the likelihood of staff rent-seeking. On the other hand, agenda setting and the shaping of the discourse around regulatory and enforcement objectives is very much subject to individual action by SEC of®cials that lead the ®ve main operations of the SEC. We therefore focus our discussion of revolving door concerns on SEC directors. Here we show a disquieting departure in the last thirty years from practices that prevailed at the SEC during its ®rst half century of existence: whereas SEC division heads through the early 1980's were, with very few exceptions, regularly internally promoted from the staff, this practice sharply ended in the late 1990s when division directors began to be recruited with increasing frequency from the private sector.
    [Show full text]