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