Jeffrey N. Schneider v. Champignon Brands Inc. — Entry #101: DECLARATION of Sharon M

Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES       Document 101   Filed 11/14/24   Page 1 of 8 Page ID
                                       #:2137


  1 Robert V. Prongay (SBN 270796)

  2
      Casey E. Sadler (SBN 274241)
      GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
  3   1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
  4   Los Angeles, California 90067
      Telephone: (310) 201-9150
  5   Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
  6   Email: rprongay@glancylaw.com
      Email: csadler@glancylaw.com
  7

  8 Counsel for Lead Plaintiff Michael G.
      Quinn and Lead Counsel for the Class
  9

 10                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 11                      CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
 12

 13
      JEFFREY N. SCHNEIDER,                     Case No. 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES
 14 Individually and On Behalf of All
      Others Similarly Situated,                DECLARATION OF
 15                                             SHARON M. MCGOWAN OF THE
                                                PUBLIC JUSTICE FOUNDATION
 16               Plaintiff,
 17                                             Date:    December 16, 2024
            v.                                  Time:    1:30 p.m.
 18                                             Crtm:    10C
 19 CHAMPIGNON BRANDS INC.,                     Judge:   James V. Selna
      GARETH BIRDSALL, and
 20 MATTHEW FISH,

 21
                  Defendants.
 22

 23

 24

 25

 26

 27

 28

                               DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES      Document 101     Filed 11/14/24    Page 2 of 8 Page ID
                                      #:2138


  1         I, Sharon M. McGowan, declare as follows:
  2         1.    I am the Chief Executive Officer of the Public Justice Foundation, a
  3 501(c)(3) non-profit charitable public foundation dedicated to advancing the public

  4 interest, and Public Justice, P.C., a national public interest law firm that advances the

  5 Public Justice Foundation’s goals (collectively “Public Justice”).

  6         2.    I understand that the above captioned matter is a class action brought by
  7 investors alleging that Defendants disseminated materially false and misleading

  8 information to the investing public regarding Braxia Scientific Corp. (formerly

  9 “Champignon Brands Inc.”) in violation of federal securities law. I submit this

 10 declaration in support of the designation of Public Justice as a cy pres recipient in this

 11 case.

 12                              Efforts on Behalf of Investors
 13         3.    Leveraging cy pres and other resources, Public Justice has been proud to
 14 advocate for investors who have been allegedly deceived by materially false and

 15 misleading statements about a stock issuer.

 16         4.    For instance, in recent years, Public Justice has identified various efforts
 17 to block cases alleging violations of federal and state securities laws for investors

 18 through such devices as “loser pays rules” and bans on class actions in initial public

 19 offerings and corporate bylaws. We have been active in advocating for the ability of

 20 shareholders to pursue their claims, and not to be barred or deterred from doing so.

 21         5.    Along with the Consumer Federation of America and other allies, Public
 22 Justice is a leader in the Secure Our Savings coalition, a collection of more than 40

 23 organizations (including consumer advocacy organizations, unions, religious groups,

 24 and investor advocacy groups), that speak out strongly on behalf of investors and

 25 against forced arbitration of shareholder claims.     For particular pieces of advocacy,
 26 we have enlisted the support of noteworthy allies, such as the American Legion. The

 27 coalition has served as a resource for reporters, policy makers and the public, and has

 28 engaged in advocacy directed at Congress and federal regulators. By way of example,

                            DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN
                                           1


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES     Document 101     Filed 11/14/24    Page 3 of 8 Page ID
                                     #:2139


  1 we have sent letters to the S.E.C. and Members of Congress speaking out against

  2 terms that would bar or deter investors from pursuing claims under the federal and

  3 state securities laws.   Several of these letters led to both the S.E.C. announcing
  4 changes in policy, and prompted several members of Congress to urge the S.E.C. to

  5 do more to protect private lawsuits enforcing the securities laws.

  6        6.     Public Justice also provides valuable information to investors,
  7 consumers, and others through publications, information clearinghouses, and

  8 participation in educational seminars.    We have invested in our communications
  9 capacity to produce high-quality coverage and built strong relationships with key

 10 media contacts.

 11        7.     As proposals to limit cases brought by investors under the federal and
 12 states securities laws have gained prominence in recent years, Public Justice attorneys

 13 have presented at educational programs aimed both at investors and attorneys who

 14 represent them. Over the past several years, Public Justice attorneys have appeared

 15 at more than two dozen continuing legal education programs, including programs of

 16 the Institute for Law and Economic Policy, a public policy research and educational

 17 foundation whose mission is to preserve, study and enhance investor and consumer

 18 access to the civil justice system. Public Justice attorneys have also appeared at

 19 several programs of the National Association of Shareholder and Consumer Attorneys

 20 (NASCAT) to address threats to securities lawsuits.          In addition, Public Justice
 21 attorneys have spoken to, written for, and appeared at several events and programs

 22 for audiences of institutional investors about threats to private enforcement of the

 23 securities laws.

 24        8.     Public Justice staff have contributed to the scholarship on these issues
 25 by writing articles and blog posts addressing threats to cases under the federal and

 26 state securities laws, see, e.g., Amy Radon, “Schwab Prefers No Regulation,” May

 27 31, 2013 (available at www.publicjustice.net/schwab-prefers-no-regulation/).        We
 28 have also co-authored op eds and other opinion pieces with notable public figures

                             DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN
                                            2


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES       Document 101     Filed 11/14/24   Page 4 of 8 Page ID
                                       #:2140


  1 working on these issues, such as John Chiang, the former State Treasurer of

  2 California, see, e.g., John Chiang and Amanda Werner, “SEC Must Not Silence Voice

  3 of Wells Fargo Investors,” San Francisco Chronicle, April 22, 2018, (available at

  4 www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/SEC-must-not-silence-voice-of-

  5 Wells-Fargo-12852555.php).

  6          Public Justice Participation in Amicus Briefs in Securities Cases
  7        9.      Public Justice has also filed amicus briefs in support of investors in
  8 several key cases in recent years. Some illustrations of this work include:

  9        A. Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v Moab Partners, L.P., 601 U.S. 257
 10             (2024). Public Justice co-authored a brief on behalf of several amici to
 11             underscore the importance of the implied private right of action under
 12             Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and explain why a
 13             broader view of the private right of action would not result in a flood of
 14             frivolous litigation.
 15        B. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co., 573 U.S. 258 (2014). Public
 16             Justice joined in an amicus brief arguing for the preservation of long-
 17             standing U.S. Supreme Court precedent supporting investors’ ability to
 18             argue for class action treatment of securities claims based upon a
 19             presumption that markets operate efficiently.
 20        C. In the Matter of Department of Enforcement Complainant v. Charles
 21             Schwab & Co. Inc. (FINRA National Adjudicatory Council, No.
 22             2011029760201, 2014). Public Justice submitted, with AARP and the
 23             National Consumer Law Center, an amici curiae brief challenging
 24             Schwab’s position that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts FINRA
 25             rules, and therefore allows brokerage houses to amend its investor contracts
 26             to ban class actions by shareholders bringing securities-related claims.
 27        D. Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085,
 28             slip op. (U.S., Feb. 27, 2013). Public Justice submitted an amici curiae brief

                             DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN
                                            3


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES          Document 101    Filed 11/14/24   Page 5 of 8 Page ID
                                          #:2141


  1               in support of investors who were allegedly defrauded by pharmaceutical
  2               giant Amgen, a leading manufacturer of drugs.          The case involved a
  3               challenge to the district court certification for class action treatment of a
  4               securities action against Amgen alleging that the company knowingly or
  5               recklessly made materially misleading statements and omissions concerning
  6               two of Amgen’s flagship products; we refuted Amgen’s arguments that
  7               securities lawsuits unfairly target the pharmaceutical industry with frivolous
  8               litigation.
  9         E. Roberts v. Triquint Semiconductor, Inc., 364 P.3d 328 (Ore. 2015). In this
 10               case in the Oregon Supreme Court, the defendant sought to force the
 11               adoption of a new forum selection by-law without the vote of the
 12               corporation’s stockholders, effectively eliminating shareholders’ ability to
 13               bring the defendant to court for any wrongdoing. Public Justice joined an
 14               amici curiae brief that argued, among other things, that such anti-investor
 15               by-law changes should not be permissible where individuals have not
 16               agreed to them.
 17         10.      Public Justice has also filed a host of amicus briefs in federal and state
 18 appellate courts on other issues relating to the civil justice system in cases that did not

 19 involve securities claims.

 20               Cy Pres Awards To Public Justice In Securities Related Cases
 21         11.      Because of Public Justice’s record of success and commitment to
 22 ensuring that cy pres awards are properly used, numerous courts have directed that

 23 the Public Justice Foundation be awarded cy pres funds. Since 2010, we have

 24 gratefully received the following cy pres designations originating from the following

 25 securities related cases:

 26         A. In re Qudian Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 1:17-cv-09741-JMF (S.D.N.Y.);
 27         B. In re Braskem S.A. Securities Litigation, No. 1:15-cv-05132-PAE
 28               (S.D.N.Y.);

                                DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN
                                               4


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES     Document 101    Filed 11/14/24   Page 6 of 8 Page ID
                                     #:2142


  1        C. Noble v. Greenberg Traurig, No. RC 11593201 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda
  2           County);
  3        D. In re Mannkind Corp. Securities Litigation, No. 2:11-cv-00929-GAF-SS
  4           (C.D. Cal.);
  5        E. In re Iomega Securities Litigation, No. 3:86-cv-00257 (D. Conn.);
  6        F. In re Coastal Physicians Group Securities Litigation, No. 1:95-cv-00306
  7           (M.D.N.C.);
  8        G. Leumi Gemel, Ltd. v. ECtel, Ltd., et al., No. 8:04-cv-03380-RWT (D. Md.);
  9        H. Gross v. Medaphis Corp., No. 1:96-cv-02088-TWT (N.D. Ga.);
 10        I. Hoffman vs. Avant! Corporation, et al, No. 5:97-cv-20698 (N.D. Cal.);
 11        J. In re Hovnanian Enterprises, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:08-cv-00999
 12           (SDW) (MCA) (D.N.J.);
 13        K. Scheiner v. i2 Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 3:01-cv-00418-L (N.D. Tex.);
 14        L. In re FLAG Telecom Holdings, Ltd. Securities Litigation, No. 1:02-cv-
 15           03400-CM-PED (S.D.N.Y.);
 16        M. Crotteau v. Addus Homecare Corporation, et al., No. 1:10-cv-01937, (N.D.
 17           Ill.);
 18        N. Jiangchen v. Rentech Inc., et al., No. 17-cv-01490-GW-FFM (C.D. Cal.);
 19        O. In re Rambus Securities Litigation, Nos. 5:06-cv-04346-JF; C-07-1238-
 20           RMV (N.D. Cal.);
 21        P. Bachow v. Swank Energy Income Advisers LP, et al., No. 3:09-cv-00262-K
 22           (N.D. Tex.); and
 23        Q. Yaron v. Intersect ENT, Inc., et al., No. 4:19-cv-02647-JSW (N.D. Cal.).
 24

 25

 26

 27

 28

                             DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN
                                            5


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES    Document 101     Filed 11/14/24   Page 7 of 8 Page ID
                                    #:2143


  1        I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
  2 America that the foregoing is true and correct.

  3        Executed this 17th day of October 2024.
  4

  5

  6                                  _____________________
  7                                  Sharon M. McGowan
                                     Chief Executive Officer, Public Justice
  8

  9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22

 23

 24

 25

 26

 27

 28

                           DECLARATION OF SHARON MCGOWAN
                                          6


Case 2:21-cv-03120-JVS-KES     Document 101     Filed 11/14/24   Page 8 of 8 Page ID
                                     #:2144


  1               PROOF OF SERVICE BY ELECTRONIC POSTING
  2        I, the undersigned say:
  3        I am not a party to the above case, and am over eighteen years old. On
  4 November 14, 2024, I served true and correct copies of the foregoing document, by

  5 posting the document electronically to the ECF website of the United States District

  6 Court for the Central District of California, for receipt electronically by the parties

  7 listed on the Court’s Service List.

  8        I affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America
  9 that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on November 14, 2024.

 10

 11                                               /s/ Casey E. Sadler
 12
                                                  Casey E. Sadler

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22

 23

 24

 25

 26

 27

 28