Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 3, 2021

IN RE NEOVASC INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:20-cv-09313
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureSecurities
In one sentence

In re Neovasc Inc. Securities Litigation: Judge Halpern granted an extension, moving the consolidated amended complaint deadline to March 19, 2021.

Who this affects

The lead plaintiff, the purported class, their counsel, and the defendants in the consolidated securities litigation were affected by the extended complaint deadline.

What happened

In re Neovasc Inc. Securities Litigation concerns the lead plaintiff’s request for more time to file a consolidated amended complaint. The existing deadline was February 19, 2021.

The lead plaintiff’s lawyers cited several scheduling conflicts, including other case deadlines, a possible trial, and a planned vacation. The defendants opposed the request because they believed the initial complaint had deficiencies.

The court granted the application and extended the time to serve and file the consolidated amended complaint to March 19, 2021. Judge Philip M. Halpern signed the order on February 3, 2021.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
IN RE NEOVASC INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION · No. 7:20-cv-09313
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Feb. 3, 2021

Background

The court had consolidated the actions and, on January 26, 2021, appointed Pratap Golla as lead plaintiff and approved Pomerantz LLP and Holzer and Holzer LLC as co-lead counsel for the purported class. That order required the consolidated amended complaint to be filed by February 19, 2021.

Request and Positions

On behalf of Golla, counsel requested a 30-day extension through March 19, 2021. Counsel cited an opposition to a motion to dismiss due February 19, an appellate brief due March 5, a tentative March 15 trial in a pro bono criminal case, and a preplanned vacation at the end of March. The letter stated that this was the plaintiff’s first extension request.

The defendants opposed the extension. According to the letter, they relied on alleged deficiencies in the initial complaint. The plaintiff responded that the court had already denied the defendants’ request for a pre-motion conference without prejudice to renewal after the consolidated amended complaint was filed, and argued that the defendants’ objections did not address the scheduling conflicts.

Ruling

Judge Philip M. Halpern granted the application and extended the time to serve and file the consolidated amended complaint to March 19, 2021. The order states that deadlines were extended as set forth in the order, but the opinion text specifically identifies the consolidated amended complaint deadline as extended to that date.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.