From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Jan 9, 2012
Case No. 3:09-cv-5840-SI (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2012)

Opinion

Master Case No. 3:07-md-1827-SI MDL NO. 1827 Case No. 3:09-cv-5840-SI Case No. 3:09-cv-4997-SI Case No. 3:09-cv-4995-SI 10-4945

01-09-2012

In re: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Document Relates to: Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., AT&T Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Target Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al.,

SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP A Limited Liability Partnership Including Professional Corporations GARY L. HALLING, Cal. Bar No. 66087 JAMES L. McGINNIS, Cal. Bar No. 95788 MICHAEL W. SCARBOROUGH, Cal. Bar No. 203524 MONA SOLOUKI, Cal. Bar No. 215145 ERIC S. O'CONNOR, Cal. Bar. No. 223244 30 Rockefeller Plaza Attorneys for Defendants SAMSUNG SDI CO., LTD. and SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC.


SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

A Limited Liability Partnership

Including Professional Corporations

GARY L. HALLING, Cal. Bar No. 66087

JAMES L. McGINNIS, Cal. Bar No. 95788

MICHAEL W. SCARBOROUGH, Cal. Bar No. 203524

MONA SOLOUKI, Cal. Bar No. 215145

ERIC S. O'CONNOR, Cal. Bar. No. 223244

30 Rockefeller Plaza

Attorneys for Defendants

SAMSUNG SDI CO., LTD. and

SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO

MOVE TO COMPEL

Defendants Samsung SDI Co., Ltd. and Samsung SDI America, Inc. ("SDI") and Plaintiffs Motorola Mobility, Inc. ("Motorola"); AT&T Mobility, LLC, AT&T Corp., AT&T Services, Inc., Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc., Pacific Bell Telephone Company, AT&T Operations, Inc., AT&T DataComm, Inc., Southwestern Bell Co. ("AT&T"); Target Corp.; Sears Roebuck and Co.; Kmart Corp.; Old Comp Inc.; Good Guys, Inc.; RadioShack Corp.; Newegg Inc. ("Target", and collectively with Motorola and AT&T, "Plaintiffs"), stipulate as follows:

Whereas, Motorola served its responses to the First Set of Interrogatories and the First Set of Requests for Production of Documents propounded by defendant SDI in the above-captioned case on October 24, 2011;

Whereas, the AT&T and Target plaintiffs served their responses to discovery requests propounded by defendant SDI in the above-captioned cases on December 7, 2011 pursuant to a prior Stipulation and Order [Dkt. No. 4216];

Whereas, SDI and Plaintiffs met and conferred regarding Motorola's response to SDI'S First Set of Interrogatories, No.1 and SDI'S First Demand for Production of Documents, No. 17, and regarding the AT&T and Target plaintiffs' responses to SDI'S First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Admission, and First set of Demands for Production of Documents (the "Discovery Requests") on December 20-21, 2011;

Whereas, the current deadline for SDI to file motions to compel with respect to the Discovery Requests in the above-captioned cases is December 23, 2011 [Dkt. Nos. 4216 and 4353]. Plaintiffs have agreed to supplement certain of their responses and will consider supplementing various other responses to the Discovery Requests, and Plaintiffs have agreed to permit SDI additional time to move to compel further responses to the Discovery Requests.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, Plaintiffs, on the one hand, and SDI, on the other hand, as follows: (i) Plaintiffs' deadline to provide any supplemental responses to the Discovery Requests shall be extended to January 30, 2012; and (ii) SDI's deadline to move to compel further responses to the Discovery Requests shall be extended to February 13, 2012.

_______________

Eric S. O'Connor (SBN 223244)

SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON

30 Rockefeller Plaza

Michael W. Scarborough (SBN 203524)

SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON

Counsel for Defendants Samsung SDI America, Inc.

and Samsung SDI Co., Ltd.

Joshua C. Stokes

Nathanial J. Wood (CA Bar No. 223547)

Jason C. Murray (CA Bar No. 169806)

Joshua C. Stokes (CA Bar No. 220214)

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Jeffrey H. Howard (pro hac vice)

Jerome A. Murphy (pro hac vice)

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Kenneth L. Adams (pro hac vice)

R. Bruce Holcomb (pro hac vice)

Christopher T. Leonardo (pro hac vice)

ADAMS HOLCOMB LLP

Counsel for Plaintiffs

Pursuant to General Order No. 45, § X-B, the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the above signatories.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

Susan Illston, United States District Judge


Summaries of

Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Jan 9, 2012
Case No. 3:09-cv-5840-SI (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2012)
Case details for

Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

Case Details

Full title:In re: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Document Relates…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Jan 9, 2012

Citations

Case No. 3:09-cv-5840-SI (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2012)