In Re Nuvelo, Inc., Securities Litigation

In Re NUVELO, INC, SECURITIES LITIGATION

Good Law
668 F. Supp. 2d 1217·2009 WL 3763879
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 17, 2009C 07-4056 VRWCalifornia7,298 words

Opinion

Opinion

Walker, J.

ORDER

Plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint (“Prior Complaint”) alleging violations of federal securities laws on November 9, 2007. Doc. # 31. On December 4, 2008, 2008 WL 5114325 , the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the Prior Complaint (“Prior Order”). Doc. # 69. The Prior Order granted plaintiffs leave to amend. Doc. # 69 at 34-35. Plaintiffs did so on January 23, 2009, filing a second consolidated amended complaint (“SAC”). Doc. # 76. On March 24, 2009, defendants moved to dismiss the SAC. Doc. # 78. This order addresses that motion.

I

As an initial matter, defendants request judicial notice of 42 documents contained in Jeffrey Kaban’s declaration (Doc. # 80, Exhs. A-¶) relating to defendants’ motion to dismiss. Doc. # 79. Federal Rule of Evidence 201 allows courts to take judicial notice of matters that are “capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b).

Plaintiffs do not oppose the court taking judicial notice of exhibits A-GG and LL-¶ . Doc. #91 at 2. Because the request for judicial notice is unopposed as to those documents, and they are either referenced…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.