4(m), even, as the Advisory Committee's Notes indicate, in the absence of "good cause."
Accordingly, the Court will deny defendants' motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint for failure to serve within 120 days of filing, and will grant plaintiffs' motion for an enlargement of time within which to serve same on the individual Grant Thornton partners.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 23rd day of February, 1994, for the reasons set forth in the Opinion accompanying this Order, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
(1) Except as set forth in paragraph 5, the Motion of Defendant Grant Thornton to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Claims Against Grant Thornton and/or to Strike Immaterial Allegations in the Amended Consolidated Class Action (Document No. 56) is DENIED.
(2) Except as set forth in paragraph 5, the Defendant Underwriters' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 58) is DENIED.
(3) Except as set forth in paragraph 5, the Motion of Defendants Chambers Development Co., Inc., and certain individual Chambers Defendants to Dismiss the Complaint (Document No. 66) is DENIED.
(4) Except to the extent set forth in paragraph 5, the defendants, J. Arthur, W. Moffett and H. Scott's Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 69) is DENIED.
(5) Count III of the Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint is DISMISSED ONLY as to those claims made pursuant to section 12(2) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 771(2), in regard to purchases of Chambers' securities on the "aftermarket."
(6) The Individual Grant Thornton Partner Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for failure to serve Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint within 120 days (Document No. 93) is DENIED.
(7) Plaintiffs' Motion for Additional Time to Serve Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (Document No. 101) is GRANTED; plaintiffs are further DIRECTED to serve said complaint on individual Grant Thornton partners on or before March 25, 1994.
(8) Defendant Grant Thornton's Application for Relief from Consolidation Provisions of Pretrial Order No. 1 (Document No. 92) is DENIED, and Civil Action No. 93-0354, Option Resource Group, et al v. Chambers Development Company, Inc., et al, (W.D. PA.) is consolidated for all pretrial purposes at MDL 982.
(9) Defendant Grant Thornton's Application for Relief from Consolidation Provisions of Pretrial Order No. 1 and Objections to Consolidation of Kaplan v. Fallon, Civil Action No. 93-0528, Pursuant to Pretrial Order No. 1 (Document No. 100) are DENIED as moot, Civil Action No. 93-0528 (W.D. PA.) having been dismissed by separate Order of Court.
(10) In accordance with the Stipulation Regarding Class Certification Procedures (Document No. 112), plaintiffs in In Re: Chambers Development Securities Litigation, shall file any consolidated motion in support of certification of both plaintiff and defendant classes and a memorandum in support thereof not to exceed 25 pages on or before March 7, 1994.
(11) Schedules for defendants' responses to any class certification motion in In Re Chambers Development Company Securities Litigation and any memoranda in opposition not to exceed 25 pages, and for class certification discovery, will be agreed upon by the parties and a proposed Pretrial Order No. 2, by Consent, concerning these matters shall be submitted to the Court for its approval on or before April 27, 1994.
(12) A status/settlement conference is scheduled for 10:30 a.m., on April 29, 1994. No continuance thereof will be considered. Counsel for the parties shall meet and confer to discuss the possibility of settlement of this action on or before April 27, 1994.
Donald J. Lee
United States District Judge