Levine v. Atricure, Inc. (594 F. Supp. 2d 471, 2009)

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

RICHARD J. HOLWELL, District Judge.

Defendants AtriCure, Inc. (“AtriCure” or the “Company”), David J. Drachman and Thomas Etergino (collectively, “defendants”) move for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3 of the Court’s September 13, 2007 Memorandum Opinion and Order, see Levine v. AtriCure, Inc., 508 F.Supp.2d 268 (S.D.N.Y.2007), denying their motion to dismiss the complaint or, in the alternative, to certify the Order for interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(6) and to stay proceedings pending any such appeal. For the reasons stated below defendants’ motion is denied.

BACKGROUND

As discussed in greater detail in the September 2007 Opinion, plaintiff purchased shares of AtriCure, a medical device company, in an initial public offering («IPO”) a£