Atanasoff v. Bradford — Entry #23: ORDER APPROVING ECF No
Case: Atanasoff v. Bradford nvd · 2:23-cv-00358
filed March 07, 2023
What this document is
Docket entry #23 · filed April 21, 2023
ORDER APPROVING ECF No. 21 Stipulation to Set Briefing Schedule for Motion to Dismiss - NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the Parties hereto, through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court , as follows: 1. Plaintiff's deadline to oppose any motion to dismiss the Complaint that Defendants file is extended until on or before June 5, 2023 (6/5/2023). 2. Defendants' deadline to reply in support of any motion to dismiss the Complaint that Defendants file is extended until on or before June 26, 2023 (6/26/2023). Signed by District Judge Anne R. Traum on 4/21/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CJS)
Who is involved
- Atanasoff
- Bradford
Why we have it
We follow this case because it names a company we track, although that company is not a party:
- CleanSpark: its name “CleanSpark, Inc.” appears in a filing in this case.
…Thomas L. Wood and Nominal Defendant Cleanspark, Inc. 7 8 UNITED…
A free copy from the RECAP archive of federal court filings (mirrored at the Internet Archive), retrieved October 26, 2026. Federal court filings are public records.
Document text
6 page(s), 14,851 characters, converted from the PDF's text layer · plain text.
Full text
Case 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW Document 23 Filed 04/21/23 Page 1 of 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA
10
ERIC ATANASOFF, Derivatively on Behalf of Case No.: 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW
11 CLEANSPARK, INC.,
Plaintiff, (Removal from District Court, Clark County,
12 Nevada, Case No. A-23-866492-C)
v.
13
14 ZACHARY K. BRADFORD, ORDER APPROVING
S. MATTHEW SCHULTZ, ROGER P.
15 BEYNON, LARRY MCNEILL, and THOMAS STIPULATION TO SET BRIEFING
L. WOOD, SCHEDULE FOR MOTION TO
16 DISMISS
Defendants,
17
18 -and-
19 CLEANSPARK, INC., a Nevada Corporation,
20 Nominal Defendant.
21 Plaintiff Eric Atanasoff (“Plaintiff”), derivatively on behalf of Nominal Plaintiff
22 CleanSpark, Inc. (“CleanSpark”) and Defendants Zachary K. Bradford, S. Matthew Schultz,
23 Larry McNeill, Thomas L. Wood, Roger P. Beynon (the “Individual Defendants”), and Nominal
24 Defendant CleanSpark (together with the Individual Defendants, “Defendants”) (collectively,
25 with Plaintiff, the “Parties”), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby enter into the
26 following stipulation and proposed order:
27 ///
28 ///
1
144760884.1
Case 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW Document 23 Filed 04/21/23 Page 2 of 6
1 The Six Derivative Actions
2 WHEREAS, on May 26, 2021, plaintiff Andrea Ciceri filed a shareholder derivative
3 action on behalf of nominal defendant CleanSpark in the United States District Court for the
4 District of Nevada, captioned Ciceri v. Bradford, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-01004-GMN-BNW
5 (“Ciceri”). Ciceri was assigned to the Honorable Gloria M. Navarro; and
6 WHEREAS, on June 22, 2021, plaintiff Mark Perna filed a second shareholder
7 derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant CleanSpark in the United States District Court
8 for the District of Nevada, captioned Perna v. Bradford, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-01181-GMN-
9 BNW (“Perna”). Perna was also assigned to the Honorable Gloria M. Navarro; and
10 WHEREAS, on June 29, 2021, Judge Navarro consolidated Ciceri and Perna into a
11 single consolidated action, captioned In re Cleanspark, Inc. Derivative Litigation, Case No.
12 2:21-cv-01004-GMN-BNW (the “Consolidated Action”) and designated the complaint filed in
13 Ciceri as the operative complaint pursuant to a Joint Stipulation and Order Consolidating Related
14 Actions and Appointing Co-Lead Counsel (the “Consolidation Order”); and
15 WHEREAS, on February 24, 2023, plaintiff Nicholas Iraci filed a third shareholder
16 derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant CleanSpark in the Eighth Judicial District Court
17 of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County, captioned Iraci v. Bradford, et al., Case No. A-
18 23-866172-C (“Iraci”); and
19 WHEREAS, on February 28, 2023, defendant S. Matthew Schultz (“Schultz”) filed a
20 Petition for Removal and Notice of Petition for Removal, removing Iraci to the United States
21 District Court for the District of Nevada. Iraci is now pending in the United States District Court
22 for the District of Nevada before the Honorable Jennifer A. Dorsey, captioned Iraci v. Bradford,
23 et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00315-JAD-NJK. On March 6, 2023, defendant Schultz filed a Notice
24 of Related Case, requesting that Iraci be transferred to Judge Navarro and added to the
25 Consolidated Action; and
26 WHEREAS, on March 1, 2023, plaintiff Eric Atanasoff filed a fourth shareholder
27 derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant CleanSpark in the Eighth Judicial District Court
28
2
144760884.1
Case 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW Document 23 Filed 04/21/23 Page 3 of 6
1 of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County, captioned Atanasoff v. Bradford, et al., Case No.
2 A-23-866492-C (“Atanasoff”); and
3 WHEREAS, on March 7, 2023, defendant Schultz filed a Petition for Removal and
4 Notice of Petition for Removal, removing Atanasoff to the United States District Court for the
5 District of Nevada. Atanasoff is now pending in this Court. On March 9, 2023, defendant
6 Schultz filed a Notice of Related Case, requesting that Atanasoff be transferred to Judge Navarro
7 and added to the Consolidated Action; and
8 WHEREAS, on February 21, 2013, plaintiff Brandon Smith filed a fifth shareholder
9 derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant CleanSpark in the Eighth Judicial District Court
10 of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County, captioned Smith v. Bradford, et al., Case No. A-
11 23-866051-C (“Smith”); and
12 WHEREAS, on March 23, 2023, Defendants filed a Petition for Removal and Notice of
13 Removal, removing Smith to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. Smith is
14 now pending in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada before Judge Navarro,
15 captioned Smith v. Bradford, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00445-GMN-BNW. On March 24, 2023,
16 Defendants filed a Notice of Related Case, requesting that Smith be added to the Consolidated
17 Action; and
18 WHEREAS, on March 8, 2023, plaintiff Travis France filed a sixth shareholder
19 derivative action on behalf of nominal defendant CleanSpark in the Eighth Judicial District Court
20 of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County, captioned France v. Bradford, et al., Case No.
21 A-23-866925-C (“France” and together with the Iraci, Atanasoff, Smith, and the Consolidated
22 Action, the “Six Derivative Actions”); and
23 WHEREAS, on March 23, 2023, Defendants filed a Petition for Removal and Notice of
24 Removal, removing France to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
25 France is also now pending in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada before
26 Judge Navarro, captioned France v. Bradford, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00444-GMN-NJK. On
27 March 24, 2023, Defendants filed a Notice of Related Case, requesting that France be added to
28 the Consolidated Action; and
3
144760884.1
Case 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW Document 23 Filed 04/21/23 Page 4 of 6
1 WHEREAS, on March 24, 2023, Defendants filed a Motion to Consolidate in the
2 Consolidated Action, with notifications for Iraci, Atanasoff, Smith, and France, requesting that
3 those cases be consolidated with the Consolidated Action before Judge Navarro; and
4 WHEREAS, between March 30, 2023 and April 6, 2023, plaintiffs in Iraci, Atanasoff,
5 Smith, and France all filed motions to remand those actions back to state court; and
6 WHEREAS, the parties in Six Derivative Actions have the following briefing deadlines:
7
Date Case Task
8
3/24/2023 Atanasoff Defendants' Motion to Consolidate Cases
9 3/24/2023 France Defendants' Motion to Consolidate Cases
3/24/2023 Iraci Defendants' Motion to Consolidate Cases
10
3/24/2023 Smith Defendants' Motion to Consolidate Cases
11 3/30/2023 Iraci Plaintiff's Motion to Remand to State Court
3/31/2023 France Plaintiff's Motion to Remand to State Court
12 4/4/2023 Atanasoff Plaintiff's Motion to Remand to State Court
13 4/6/2023 Smith Plaintiff's Motion to Remand to State Court
4/7/2023 France Plaintiff's Response to Motion to Consolidate
14 4/7/2023 Atanasoff Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
15 4/11/2023 France Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
4/13/2023 Iraci Defendants' Opposition to Motion to Remand
16 4/14/2023 France Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
4/14/2023 Atanasoff Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
17
4/14/2023 France Defendants' Opposition to Motion to Remand
18 4/17/2023 Iraci Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
4/17/2023 Smith Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
19
4/18/2023 Atanasoff Defendants' Opposition to Motion to Remand
20 4/20/2023 Smith Defendants' Opposition to Motion to Remand to State Court
4/20/2023 Iraci Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Remand
21
4/21/2023 France Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Remand
22 4/24/2023 Smith Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
4/24/2023 Iraci Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Consolidate
23 4/24/2023 Iraci Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
24 4/25/2023 Atanasoff Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Remand
Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant's Opposition to Motion to Remand to State
25 4/27/2023 Smith Court
5/5/2023 Atanasoff Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
26
5/11/2023 France Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (pending court approval)
27 5/24/2023 Iraci Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (pending
28 6/1/2023 France court approval)
4
144760884.1
Case 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW Document 23 Filed 04/21/23 Page 5 of 6
1 6/5/2023 Atanasoff Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (pending court approval)
6/14/2023 Iraci Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
2
Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (pending
3 6/26/2023 Atanasoff court approval)
4 This Action
5 WHEREAS, on April 5, 2023, after meeting and conferring extensively, the Parties
6 submitted a joint Stipulation and [proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond to Complaint
7 (the “Stipulation”), agreeing, subject to the Court’s approval, to extend: (i) Defendants’ time to
8 respond to the Complaint until May 5, 2023, (ii) Plaintiff’s time to oppose any motion to dismiss
9 the Complaint that Defendants file until on or before June 5, 2023, and (iii) Defendants’ time to
10 reply in support of any motion to dismiss the Complaint that Defendants file until on or before
11 June 26, 2023; and
12 WHEREAS, on April 6, 2023, Magistrate Brenda Weksler granted the Stipulation in part
13 and denied it in part, extending Defendants’ time to respond to the Complaint until May 5, 2023,
14 but instructing the Parties to make a separate filing setting forth their proposed briefing schedule
15 for any motion to dismiss that Defendants file pursuant to LR IC 2-2(b); and
16 WHEREAS, Defendants intend to move to dismiss the Complaint in this Action on or
17 before May 5, 2023; and
18 WHEREAS, given the crowded briefing schedules in the Six Derivative Actions, the
19 Parties agree to extend the deadline for Plaintiff to oppose any motion to dismiss the Complaint
20 that Defendants file until on or before June 5, 2023; and
21 WHEREAS, given the crowded briefing schedules in the Six Derivative Actions, the
22 Parties agree to extend the deadline for Defendants to reply in support of any motion to dismiss
23 the Complaint until on or before June 26, 2023.
24 NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the Parties
25 hereto, through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, as follows:
26 1. Plaintiff’s deadline to oppose any motion to dismiss the Complaint that
27 Defendants file is extended until on or before June 5, 2023.
28 2. Defendants’ deadline to reply in support of any motion to dismiss the Complaint
5
144760884.1
Case 2:23-cv-00358-ART-BNW Document 23 Filed 04/21/23 Page 6 of 6
1 that Defendants file is extended until on or before June 26, 2023.
2 3. Other than as agreed herein, the Parties reserve all rights.
3 DATED: April 17, 2023 DATED: April 17, 2023
4
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP ALDRICH LAW FIRM, LTD.
5
/s/ Colleen E. McCarty /s/ John P. Aldrich
6 MARK J. CONNOT (10010) JOHN P. ALDRICH (6877)
COLLEEN E. MCCARTY (13186) CATHERINE HERNANDEZ (8410)
7 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Ste. 700 7866 West Sahara Avenue
8 Las Vegas, NV 89135 Las Vegas, Nevada 89117
mconnot@foxrothschild.com jaldrich@johnaldrichlawfirm.com
9 cmccarty@foxrothschild.com chernandez@johnaldrichlawfirm.com
Counsel for Defendants
10
DATED: April 17, 2023
11
12 THE WEISER LAW FIRM, P.C.
13 /s/ James M. Ficaro
JAMES M. FICARO
14 200 Barr Harbor Drive
West Conshohocken, PA 19428
15
16 Counsel for Plaintiff Eric Atanasoff
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
20
_____________________________________
21 Anne R. Traum
United States District Court Judge
22
DATED: April 21, 2023.
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
144760884.1