Rochester Laborers Pension Fund v. Monsanto Company et al
| Rochester Laborers Pension Fund |
| Monsanto Company, Hugh Grant, Terrell Crews and Carl Casale |
| 4:2010cv01380 |
| July 29, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Louis - City |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
88
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss 81 is granted, and plaintiff's second amended complaint is dismissed with prejudice. A separate Judgment in accordance with this Memorandum and Order is entered the same date. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on August 1, 2012. (MCB)
|
|
Filing
77
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (see order for details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint [# 74 ] is granted, and plaintiff's second amended class action complaint [# 75 -1] is deemed filed as of this date. IT IS F URTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [# 61 ] is denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agreed scheduling motion [# 76 ] is granted only as follows: defendants' motion to dismiss and supporting memorandum shall be filed as set out above by February 29, 2012. Plaintiff shall file any responsive memorandum by March 23, 2012, and any reply brief may be filed by April 6, 2012. ( Response to Court due by 2/29/2012.) Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on 01/31/2012. (CBL)
|
|
Filing
72
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to supplement the record [# 68 ] is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, no later than January 11, 2012, plaintiff shall file a written memorandum advising the Court whether i t intends to seek leave to amend the second amended complaint. Plaintiff waives its right to seek amendment if it fails to comply with this Memorandum and Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any motion for leave to amend and accompanying proposed amended complaint must be filed by Friday, January 20, 2012. Defendants shall file any opposition to the motion to amend by January 30, 2012 , and any reply brief shall be filed by plaintiff no later than February 6, 2012 . The standard page limitations shall apply. (Response to Court due by 1/11/2012.) Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on January 5, 2012. (BRP)
|
|
Filing
51
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for appointment as lead plaintiff and for appointment of lead counsel [#31] is granted, and Arkansas Teacher Retirement System is appointed lead plaintiff, and Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP is appointed lead counsel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other pending motions [#27, #30, #33] are denied. Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on November 1, 2010. (MGK)
|
|
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion for consolidation [#19] is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file any documentation supporting a request for appointment as lead plaintiff by October 4, 2010. Fa ilure to timely comply with this Order will result in a waiver of its right to request appointment as lead plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any opposition to motions for appointment as lead plaintiff must be filed by October 14, 2010, and any reply briefs are due by October 24, 2010.( Response to Court due by 10/4/2010.) Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on September 28, 2010. (MGK)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
