In Re: Mellanox Technologies, Ltd., Securities Litigation

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 10 MOTION to Appoint Counsel Notice of Motion and Motion of Eisenberg O. Management & Consulting Ltd. for Appointment as Lead Plaintiff, Appointment of Lead Counsel, and Consolidation of Related Actions., 22 MOTION to Consolidate Cases 1:13-cv-925; 1:13-cv-1047; 1:13-cv-1225. MOTION to Appoint Harel Provident Funds and Education FUnds Ltd., Harel Atidit Provident Funds Ltd., Harel Pension Fund Management Company Ltd., Israeli Shares Partnership, Dikla Insurance Company Ltd., Clal Insurance Ltd., Clal Pension and Provident MOTION to Appoint Counsel Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP. and In Response to Competing Motions. Document

10 Cited authorities

Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.
561 U.S. 247 (2010) Cited 1,456 times 177 Legal Analyses
Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction
In re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc.
960 F.2d 285 (2d Cir. 1992) Cited 678 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that Shutts did not require opt-out rights in a Rule 23(b)(B) class action because the plaintiffs had already submitted to the district court's jurisdiction by filing bankruptcy claims against the defendant
Foley v. Transocean Ltd.
272 F.R.D. 126 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) Cited 95 times
Rejecting challenge that Danish pension fund would "saddle the class with unnecessary and additional costs"; "courts in this District and others have routinely appointed foreign investors as lead plaintiff"
Glauser v. EVCI Center Colleges Holding Corp.
236 F.R.D. 190 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) Cited 60 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding typicality where proposed lead plaintiff " like all class members" purchased the securities at issue during the proposed class period at prices allegedly artificially inflated by the defendants' false and misleading statements or omissions and suffered damage thereby
In re CMED Sec. Litig.
11 Civ. 9297 (KBF) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 2, 2012) Cited 25 times
Concluding that a three-member investor group that jointly moved for lead plaintiff designation "in consultation with our counsel" was not independently formed
In re Veeco Instruments, Inc.
233 F.R.D. 330 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) Cited 32 times
Concluding that FIFO is "the appropriate methodology . . . for the purpose of considering the financial stake of the movant for lead plaintiff status"
Bruce v. Suntech Power Holdings Co.
No. CV 12-04061 RS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2012) Cited 15 times
Disregarding arguments that an investor group was "cobbled together" because the group had the largest financial interest, both as a whole and as to one member individually
In re Able Laboratories Securities Litigation
425 F. Supp. 2d 562 (D.N.J. 2006) Cited 21 times
Allowing two movants, each of whom filed separate motions and certifications within the sixty-day deadline, to unite and be appointed lead plaintiff as a group after the deadline
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,858 times 1232 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,451 times 48 Legal Analyses
Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

In Re: Mellanox Technologies, Ltd., Securities Litigation

10 Cited authorities

Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction

Holding that Shutts did not require opt-out rights in a Rule 23(b)(B) class action because the plaintiffs had already submitted to the district court's jurisdiction by filing bankruptcy claims against the defendant

Rejecting challenge that Danish pension fund would "saddle the class with unnecessary and additional costs"; "courts in this District and others have routinely appointed foreign investors as lead plaintiff"

Finding typicality where proposed lead plaintiff " like all class members" purchased the securities at issue during the proposed class period at prices allegedly artificially inflated by the defendants' false and misleading statements or omissions and suffered damage thereby

Concluding that a three-member investor group that jointly moved for lead plaintiff designation "in consultation with our counsel" was not independently formed

Concluding that FIFO is "the appropriate methodology . . . for the purpose of considering the financial stake of the movant for lead plaintiff status"

Disregarding arguments that an investor group was "cobbled together" because the group had the largest financial interest, both as a whole and as to one member individually

Allowing two movants, each of whom filed separate motions and certifications within the sixty-day deadline, to unite and be appointed lead plaintiff as a group after the deadline

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party