United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 2025

IN RE ENOVIX CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION

IN RE ENOVIX CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION
United States District Court for the Northern District of California · Decided July 8, 2025
IN RE ENOVIX CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION

Trial Court Opinion

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 IN RE: ENOVIX CORP. SECURITIES Case No. 23-cv-00071-SI 8 LITIGATION 9 ORDER RE: DISCOVERY STAY 0 Re: Dkt. Nos. 178, 180 13 The Court has reviewed the letters from the parties, Dkt. Nos. 178 and 180, and the relevant S 14 || law. See 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(3)(B). This order hereby notifies the parties that discovery remains 15 || open during the pendency of defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings. Following a 16 || two rounds of motions to dismiss, the Court has already “sustained the legal sufficiency” of at least = 17 some of the operative complaint. See Powers v. Eichen, 961 F. Supp. 233, 236 (S.D. Cal. 1997) || (recounting legislative history of Private Securities Litigation Reform Act). And because defendants || have moved for partial judgment on the pleadings, some portion of this case will move forward || regardless. In these circumstances, the Court agrees with plaintiffs that the PSLRA’s automatic || discovery stay does not apply. See In re Facebook, Inc. Secs. Litig., No. 18-cv-01725-EJD, at *1-2 || (N.D. Cal. Feb. 19, 2025) (after multiple motions to dismiss and a complaint sustained on appeal, || ordering that discovery proceed in parallel with any future motion for judgment on the pleadings, || notwithstanding the PSLRA’s automatic discovery stay).

25 IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 || Dated: July 8, 2025 Site WU tee SUSAN ILLSTON 28 United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.