IN RE ENOVIX CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION

— 1 — — 2 — — 3 — 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — 6 — 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 — 11 — — 12 — 5 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 3 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) 18 || (recounting legislative history of Private Securities Litigation Reform Act). And because defendants 19 || have moved for partial judgment on the pleadings, some portion of this case will move forward 20 || regardless. In these circumstances, the Court agrees with plaintiffs that the PSLRA’s automatic 21 || discovery stay does not apply. See In re Facebook, Inc. Secs. Litig., No. 18-cv-01725-EJD, at *1-2 22 || (N.D. Cal. Feb. 19, 2025) (after multiple motions to dismiss and a complaint sustained on appeal, 23 || ordering that discovery proceed in parallel with any future motion for judgment on the pleadings, 24 || notwithstanding the PSLRA’s automatic discovery stay). 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 || Dated: July 8, 2025 Site WU tee — 27 — SUSAN ILLSTON 28 United States District Judge