Berry

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS; DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE

Presently before the Court are Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint, and Motion to Strike. Plaintiffs timely filed Oppositions to both Motions and Defendant filed timely Replies. The Court finds it appropriate to take the Motions under submission without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b).

On May 15, 2009, 616 F.Supp.2d 987 (N.D.Cal.2009), the Court issued an Order denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ original Complaint with leave to amend, (hereafter, “Order,” Docket Item No. 57.) In the Order, the Court found that Plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that Defendant both signed and substantially participated in the creation of the 2003 Proxy Statement and that Defendant signed the Notes Registration Statement. (Order, 616 F.Supp.2d at 995 .) Plaintiffs thus stated a claim for primary liability under § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. (IcL) As to documents other than the 2003 Proxy Statement and the Notes Registration Statement, however, the Court found that Plaintiffs did not allege with sufficient specificity the nature and extent of…