United States v. 2020-05-19 | 16-56069 | KARIM KHOJA V. OREXIGEN THERAPEUTICS, INC. | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KARIM KHOJA, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
PROVINCE, INC., as the Wind Down
Administrator for Orexigen Therapeutics,
Inc.; JOSEPH P. HAGAN; MICHAEL A.
NARACHI; PRESTON KLASSEN,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-56069
DC No. 3:15 cv-00540 JLS
MEMORANDUM
*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted November 6, 2017
Pasadena, California
Administratively Closed August 13, 2018
Resubmitted April 28, 2020
**
FILED
MAY 19 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
* *
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for
resubmission for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Before:TASHIMA and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and PAYNE,
***
District
Judge.

On August 13, 2018, we filed our opinion in this case, Khoja v. Orexigen
Therapeutics Inc., 899 F.3d 988 (9th Cir. 2018), cert. denied, sub nom. Hagen v.
Khoja, 1395 S. Ct. 2615 (2019). Because, during the pendancy of this appeal,
Orexigen filed a voluntary Chapter 11 petition, and the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C.
§ 362(a) came into effect, we noted that that “opinion [did] not address or decide
Plaintiff’s appeal as against defendant-appellee Orexigen.” Id. at 994 n.1.
Orexigen’s successor in interest, Province, Inc., as the Wind Down
Administrator for Orexigen Therapeutics Inc.,
1
has now filed a status report
indicating that the bankruptcy court, per the parties’ stiuplation, has lifted the § 362
stay with respect to this case. We have therefore resubmitted this appeal for
decision with respect to Orexigen.
2
* * *
The Honorable Robert E. Payne, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Virginia, sitting by designation.
1
For convenience, we refer to Orexigen’s successor, the Wind Down
Administrator, as “Orexigen.”
2
We note that Orexigen fully participated in the briefing and oral
argument on November 6, 2017; the § 362 stay did not come into effect until after
oral argument and submission of the case for decision. See id.
2

We have, again, reviewed the parties’ briefs and our opinion in Orexigen.
After such review, we fully adopt our opinion in Orexigen, 899 F.3d 988, to
resolve Plaintiff’s appeal as against Defendant Orexigen.
Therefore, with respect to Plaintiff’s appeal as against Defendant-Appellee
Province, Inc., as the Wind Down Administrator for Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc.,
the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED. No costs.
3