Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[Investor2014]

Good move by K&L Gates on behalf of Anavex: Re: Blum v. Anavex Life Sciences Corp., No. 1:24-cv-1910-CM

Essentially there won't be any case unless further parties join through motions for lead plaintiff within the 60 day deadline. Anavex can then wait for a potentially more coherent amended and consolidated complaint before having to respond, or never respond if no one else turns up and the case is dismissed.

As I previously mention if no one files a motion for lead plaintiff, its a good indication that the case has no merit.

Dear Judge McMahon: C}. 1) ~ We represent Defendants Anavex Life Sciences Corporation and Christopher Missling
("Defendants") in the above-captioned matter. We have conferred with counsel for Plaintiff and
write to requ est a stay of the deadline to respond to the currently operative complaint pending :P0/L ;~
resolution of the lead plaintiff process pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ~
("PSLRA"), 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4. Plai ntiff consents to this request.
We observe that section IV.M of Your Honor's Individual Practices and Procedures {}
provides that, in cases su bject to the PSLRA, the Court shall set a schedule for fil ing a J ~j/
consol idated amended complaint and briefing motions to dismiss after selection of a lead plaintiff C ~'
In the meantime, however, there are deadlines on the docket for Defendants to respond to the
currently operative complaint. Consistent with the apparent intent of the Court's Individual
Practices and to promote efficiency in light of the required lead plaintiff process, the parties o:/1
propose that deadlines to respond to the current complaint be stayed pending selection of a lead
plaintiff and the filing of a consolidated amended complaint (or notification that the lead plai~tiff )
wishes to proceed under the currently operative complaint) . :,-r ~
Thank you for your cons1derat1on . f' ("' .fl
Sincerely,
Theodore L. Kornobis