Bristol County Retirement System v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al
| Bristol County Retirement System |
| Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Hans Vestberg, Jan Frykhammar, Magnus Mandersson, Borje E. Ekholm and Carl Mellander |
| 1:2018cv03021 |
| April 5, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Richard J. Sullivan |
| 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
68
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: Based upon these findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Court has determined, and now holds, that all legal claims and defenses presented in this lawsuit were non-frivolous under existing law, and that all factual contentions had evidentiary support or were reasonably based on belief or a lack of information. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/13/2020) (jca)
|
|
Filing
65
ORDER... The Court having been advised at ECF No. 64 that Plaintiffs do not intend to file a third amended complaint, it is ORDERED that the above-entitled action be and is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. Under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the Court must, "[u]pon final adjudication of the action,... include in the record specific findings regarding compliance by each party and each attorney representing any party with each requirement of Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as to any complaint, responsive pleading, or dispositive motion." 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(c)(1). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for the Courts consideration pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(c)(1) by March 11, 2020. By the same date, Plaintiffs shall submit copies of their submissions, in Microsoft Word format, by e-mail to the Court. Defendants shall file any opposition to Plaintiffs' proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by March 18, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/12/20) (yv)
|
|
Filing
63
NOTICE AND ORDER OF WITHDRAWALOF COUNSEL: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, upon the annexed declaration of Maxwell Kosman and subject to the approval of the Court, Maxwell Kosman hereby withdraws as counsel for Defendants Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Ha ns Vestberg, Jan Frykhammar, Borje E. Ekholm, Carl Mellander, and Magnus Mandersson ("Defendants"), and shall be removed from the Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) notification list in the above-captioned matter. Paul, Weiss, R ifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP will continue to represent Defendants in this proceeding. Application GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Maxwell Kosman as counsel, and to terminate ECF No. 62. (Attorney Maxwell Arlie Halpern Kosman terminated.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/23/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
61
OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 claims must be and are dismissed. It follows that their Section 20(a) claim fails as well. See, e.g., City of Monroe, 2011 WL 4357368, at *2 (noting that a Sect ion 20(a) claim requires a successfully pleaded primary violation by the controlled person (internal quotation marks omitted)). The Court need not and does not reach Defendants other arguments for dismissal, including their contention that the Co urt lacks personal jurisdiction over individual Defendant Mellander. See, e.g., ONY, Inc. v. Cornerstone Therapeutics, Inc., 720 F.3d 490, 498 n.6 (2d Cir. 2013) (Although we traditionally treat personal jurisdiction as a threshold question to be addressed prior to consideration of the merits of a claim, that practice is prudential and does not reflect a restriction on the power of the courts to address legal issues. In cases involving multiple defendants over some of whom the court indis putably has personal jurisdiction in which all defendants collectively challenge the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff's cause of action, [a court may] proceed[] directly to the merits on a motion to dismiss. (citations and internal quotat ion marks omitted)). In a footnote, Plaintiffs request leave to amend. See ECF No. 57, at 40 n.16. The Court is skeptical that Plaintiffs will be able to allege additional facts sufficient to cure the defects identified above. Nevertheless, the Cou rt recognizes that there is a strong preference for granting leave to amend in securities cases, such as this one, that involve a complex commercial reality and a long, multi-prong complaint. Loreley Fin. (Jersey) No. 3 Ltd. v. Wells Fargo Sec., LLC, 797 F.3d 160, 191 (2d Cir. 2015); Ong v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., No. 16- CV-141 (KPF), 2017 WL 933108, at*19 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 8, 2017); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Accordingly, out of an abundance of caution, leave to amend is GRANTE D. No further opportunities to amend the Complaint to address the issues raised in the motion to dismiss will be given. Plaintiffs shall file any third amended complaint within thirty days. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 53. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/10/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
33
OPINION AND ORDER re: 21 MOTION to Appoint Greater Pennsylvania Carpenters' Pension Fund to serve as lead plaintiff(s) and for Approval of Selection of Lead Counsel. filed by Greater Pennsylvania Carpenters' Pension Fund, [2 4] MOTION to Appoint Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System to serve as lead plaintiff(s) and Approval of Lead Plaintiff's Selection of Counsel. filed by Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that OLERS's motion for appointment as lead plaintiff is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Robbins Geller shall serve as lead counsel for the putative class. As. provided in the Court's June 5, 2018 Order (Doc. No. 27), OLERS shall file a consolidated amended complaint with sixty days of the date of this order - that is, by Friday, September 21, 2018. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 21 and 24. The Cler k of Court is also respectfully directed to change the caption of this action to "Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System et al. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al." SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Richard J. Sullivan on 7/24/2018) (ne)
|
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 New York Southern 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.
