Case: 3:09-cv-00106-CVG-GWB
Document #: 3
Filed: 12/18/2009
Page 1 of 6
CIVIL NO. 2009-106
Plaintiff,
v.
)
Defendant.
)
)
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME
Defendant The Bear Stearns Companies Inc. ("Bear Stearns" or
"defendant"), hereby respectfully moves, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b), for an
enlargement of time within which to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the
Verified Complaint ("Complaint") of plaintiff Financial Trust Company, Inc.
("plaintiff'), and in support thereof states:
1.
Service of the Complaint was effected on November 30, 2009.
Accordingly, defendant's time to answer, move, or otherwise respond expires on
December 21, 2009.
2.
The Complaint alleges that Bear Stearns made material misstatements
regarding the value of its mortgage-related assets, the adequacy of its liquidity and
EFTA00608057
Case: 3:09-cv-00106-CVG-GWB
Document #: 3
Filed: 12/18/2009
Page 2 of 6
Civil No. 2009-106
Page 2
capital reserves, and the quality of its risk management in order to induce plaintiff
to retain its shares of Bear Steams stock.
3.
On December 3, 2009, counsel for defendant filed with the Judicial
Panel on Multi-District Litigation (the "MDL Panel") a Rule 7.5 Notice of
Potential Tag-Along Action (the "Notice"), informing the MDL Panel that the
instant action (the "Action") is related to the consolidated multidistrict litigation In
re The Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. Securities, Derivative and ERISA Litigation,
08 M.D.L. 1963 (S.D.N.Y.) (RWS) (the "MDL Action"), pending in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York before the Honorable
Robert W. Sweet. A copy of the Notice was served on plaintiff's counsel.
4.
In August 2008, the MDL Panel joined for consolidated or
coordinated pretrial purposes fifteen actions (the "Related Actions") against Bear
Stearns concerning "whether Bear Stearns and certain of its current and former
officers and directors knowingly made material misstatements or omissions
concerning the company's financial health that misled investors and caused
investor losses when the company's stock price fell in March 2008." The MDL
Panel also indicated in the MDL Panel Order that all pending and future related
actions would be treated as potential tag-along actions and transferred to the
EFTA00608058
Case: 3:09-cv-00106-CVG-GWB
Document #: 3
Filed: 12/18/2009
Page 3 of 6
Civil No. 2009-106
Page 3
Southern District of New York for consolidated or coordinated pretrial
proceedings.
5.
Since the MDL Panel's August 2008 Order, the MDL Panel has
transferred all related actions filed against Bear Steams to the Southern District of
New York and Judge Sweet. See, e.g., Wang v. The Bear Stearns Companies Inc.,
et at, No. 09 Civ. 1200 (RWS) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2009); Rand v. The Bear
Stearns Companies Inc., et at, No. 08 Civ. 8194 (RWS) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23,
2008).
6.
The Complaint in this Action shares numerous questions of fact with
the Related Actions. Namely, all of the actions center on allegations that Bear
Stearns made material misstatements or omissions concerning its financial
condition that misled plaintiffs and caused them losses when Bear Stearns' stock
price dropped.
7.
Given the overlapping factual issues, defendant anticipates that
transfer of this Action by the MDL Panel is likely.
8.
Accordingly, to promote judicial efficiency and avoid duplicative
proceedings when the Action is transferred, on December 9, 2009, the undersigned
requested that plaintiff grant defendant an extension of time to answer, move, or
EFTA00608059
Case: 3:09-cv-00106-CVG-GWB
Document #: 3
Filed: 12/18/2009
Page 4 of 6
Civil No. 2009-106
Page 4
otherwise respond to the Complaint until ten (10) days after the MDL Panel
decides whether the Action should be transferred to the Southern District of New
York. In the alternative, counsel for plaintiff was asked for an extension of 60
days.
9.
On December 15, 2009, counsel for plaintiff stated that he was still
discussing the request for an extension with his client.
10.
On December 18, 2009, nine days after defendant's initial request for
an extension, the undersigned received an email from counsel for plaintiff agreeing
to extend defendant's time to respond to the Complaint only through December 30,
2009. The email advised that plaintiff might, but was not obligating itself to,
consider further discussions on the subject in the interim.
11.
Because plaintiff has not agreed to a sufficient extension of time to
allow the MDL Panel to determine the issue of transfer of the Action, counsel for
defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant an extension of defendant's
time to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint until ten (10) days
after the MDL Panel decides whether the Action should be transferred to the
Southern District of New York for consolidated or coordinated pretrial
proceedings.
EFTA00608060
Case: 3:09-cv-00106-CVG-GWB
Document #: 3
Filed: 12/18/2009
Page 5 of 6
Civil No. 2009-106
Page 5
12.
No prior application has been made seeking an enlargement of time
within which to file an answer or responsive pleading to the Complaint.
Dated: St. Thomas, V.I.
December 18, 2009
DUDLEY, TOPPER and FEUERZEIG, LLP
/s/ Chad C. Messier
By:
Chad C. Messier (V.I. Bar No. 497)
1000 Frederiksberg Gade
P.O. Box 756
St. Thomas, VI 00804
Telephone: (340) 715-4436
Telefax:
(340) 715-4400
Email:
[email protected]
Attorney for Defendant
The Bear Steams Companies Inc.
EFTA00608061
Case: 3:09-cv-00106-CVG-GWB
Document #: 3
Filed: 12/1812009
Page 6 of 6
Civil No. 2009-106
Page 6
I hereby certify that on December 18, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing
with the Clerk of the Court using the CWEFC system, which will send a notification
of such filing (NEF) to:
John K. Dema, Esq.
Law Offices of John K. Dema, P.C.
1236 Strand Street, Suite 103
St. Croix, VI 00820-5008
/s/ Chad C. Messier
EFTA00608062