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 12, 2012
Master Docket No. 07-m-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2012)

Opinion

Master Docket No. 07-m-1827 SI

01-12-2012

In re TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Document Relates To: Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., C 09-5840 SI AT&T Mobility LLC, et al. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., C 09-4997SI Target Corp., et al. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. CV-04945 SI

Jeffrey H. Howard (pro hac vice) Jerome A. Murphy (pro hac vice) CROWELL & MORING LLP Jason C. Murray (CA Bar No. 169806) Joshua C. Stokes (CA Bar No. 220214) CROWELL & MORING LLP Counsel for Plaintiff Motorola Mobility, Inc, AT&T Mobility LLC, et al., Target Corp, et al. [Additional counsel listed on signature page]


Jeffrey H. Howard (pro hac vice)

Jerome A. Murphy (pro hac vice)

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Jason C. Murray (CA Bar No. 169806)

Joshua C. Stokes (CA Bar No. 220214)

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Counsel for Plaintiff Motorola Mobility, Inc,

AT&T Mobility LLC, et al., Target Corp, et al.

[Additional counsel listed on signature page]

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER FURTHER EXTENDING

PLAINTIFFS' TIME TO MOVE TO

COMPEL AS TO CERTAIN

DISCOVERY

Defendant Hannstar Display Corporation ("Hannstar") and Plaintiffs Motorola Mobility, Inc., AT&T Mobility, LLC, AT&T Corp., AT&T Services, Inc., Pacific Bell Telephone Company, AT&T Operations, Inc., AT&T DataComm, Inc., Southwestern Bell Co., Target Corp., Sears, Roebuck and Co., Kmart Corp., Old Comp Inc., Good Guys, Inc., RadioShack Corp., and Newegg Inc. (collectively "Plaintiffs") stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS Plaintiffs served a Joint Set of Interrogatories and a Joint Set of Requests for Production of Documents on Hannstar and certain other defendants on November 2, 2011 (the "Discovery");

WHEREAS Hannstar provided Responses and Objections to the Discovery on December 5, 2011;

WHEREAS the parties have met and conferred regarding Hannstar's Responses and Objections to the Discovery, but require additional time to complete the meet and confer process;

WHEREAS Hannstar may wish to supplement its Responses and Objections to the Discovery upon completing the meet and confer process;

WHEREAS Hannstar intends to produce additional documents, but such production will not occur prior to the deadline for filing motions to compel;

WHEREAS the current deadline to file motions to compel in the above-captioned cases is January 13, 2012, pursuant to Order of the Court dated December 19, 2011, and Hannstar has agreed to permit Plaintiffs additional time to move to compel further responses to the Discovery;

THEREFORE, Hannstar and Plaintiffs, by their respective undersigned counsel, stipulate and agree as follows:

The deadline for Plaintiffs to move to compel further response to the Discovery shall be extended to February 10, 2012.

_______________

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 Plaintiff Motorola Mobility, Inc., 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., and Southwestern Bell Telephone

Company, Target Corporation; Sears, Roebuck and

Co.; Kmart Corporation; Old Comp Inc.; Good Guys,

Inc.; RadioShack Corporation; and Newegg Inc.

Christopher M. Wyant

Hugh F. Bangasser, (Pro Hac Vice)

Ramona M. Emerson, (Pro Hac Vice)

Christopher M. Wyant, (Pro Hac Vice)

K&L GATES LLP

Jeffrey L. Bornstein, State Bar No. 99358

K&L GATES LLP

Attorneys for Defendant HannStar Display

Corporation

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

Hon. 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 12, 2012
Master Docket No. 07-m-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 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 To:…

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

Date published: Jan 12, 2012

Citations

Master Docket No. 07-m-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2012)