Summary
holding that where class had proposed injunctive classes alongside damages classes that "[c]ertification of any Statewide Classes under Rule 23(b) likewise is inappropriate in light of the fact that Plaintiffs' primary intent in this litigation is to recover damages for past purchases"
Summary of this case from In re Processed Egg Prods. Antitrust Litig.Opinion
No. C 07-0086-SBA.
June 8, 2010
MICHAEL F. TUBACH (S.B. #145955), RYAN J. PADDEN (S.B. #204515), CHRISTOPHER S. HALES (S.B. #233349), CHRISTINA J. BROWN (S.B. #242130), O'MELVENY MYERS LLP, San Francisco, CA, KENNETH R. O'ROURKE (S.B. #120144), O'MELVENY MYERS LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Attorneys for Defendants, HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC. AND HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC.
[ PROPOSED ] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS SAMSUNG AND HYNIX'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL PORTION OF ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULES 7-11 AND 79-5
On March 31, 2010, this Court issued its Order Denying Indirect-Purchaser Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification; Denying Indirect-Purchaser Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend; and Granting in Part and Denying in Part Indirect-Purchaser Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Claims of Christopher Bessette (the "Order"). The Court placed the Order under seal, and required the parties by April 22, 2010 to "jointly advise the Court which facts, if any, they contend should be redacted from the public version of this ruling. To the extent any party seeks redaction of any portion of the Court's ruling, such party shall provide the Court with the legal authority for such request and a proposed redacted order for public disclosure." (Order at 29.)
In anticipation of the motion hearing, Defendants filed a Motion for Administrative Relief Pursuant to Local Rule 7-11 for Order Directing the United States Marshals Service and/or Federal Security Services to Admit into the Federal Courthouse Electronic Equipment for Use at Hearing. Since the motion was resolved without a hearing, this request is denied as moot.
With respect to this Order, on April 22, 2010, Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., ("Samsung") and Hynix Semiconductor Inc. and Hynix Semiconductor America Inc. ("Hynix") filed an Administrative Motion to Seal Portion of Order Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5 ("Motion to Seal") seeking to seal the percentages of Samsung's and Hynix's NAND Flash sales attributable to Apple, and the amount and proportion of Apple's purchases from Defendants, and to redact those figures from the public version of the Order. ( See Order at 14:5-9.) Also on April 22, 2010, Samsung filed the Declaration of Joseph C. Sarles in Support of the Motion to Seal, and Hynix filed the Declaration of Christina J. Brown in Support of the Motion to Seal.
After due consideration of the papers submitted, the Court's previously entered Protective Order, and the Court's file in this matter, and good cause appearing therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Motion to Seal is GRANTED. The Clerk shall place in the public record the redacted version of the Court's March 31, 2010 Order, as lodged by Defendants and modified by the Court. The public, redacted version will include a case citation update and will delete paragraph 5 of the Conclusion on page 29 of the under seal order, since that provision is now moot for purposes of the public version of the order.
2. Defendants' Motion for Administrative Relief Pursuant to Local Rule 7-11 for Order Directing the United States Marshals Service and/or Federal Security Services to Admit into the Federal Courthouse Electronic Equipment for Use at Hearing is DENIED as moot.
3. This order terminates Docket Nos. 690 and 712.
IT IS SO ORDERED.