Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In Re Static Random Access Memory (Sram) Antitrust Litigation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION


January 3, 2011

IN RE STATIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (SRAM) ANTITRUST LITIGATION

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Claudia Wilken United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND ORDER

This Document Relates to: REGARDING CORPORATE DEFENDANT FAMILY REFERENCES ALL ACTIONS AND SETTLEMENT SETOFFS STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING CORPORATE DEFENDANT FAMILY REFERENCES AND SETTLEMENT SETOFFS

WHEREAS, the Court, in its December 16, 2010 Order on Motions in Limine and for Pre-Trial Preparation, directed the Parties to attempt to stipulate regarding, inter alia, (a) the use of combined, singular references at trial to multiple entities within a particular current or former Defendant corporate family; and (b) the process for taking into account prior settlements in calculating the final amount of any damage awards that may be entered in these actions; and WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred on these and other issues directed by the Court, and have reached agreement as set forth below;

NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated by the undersigned counsel on behalf of the Parties identified below, and subject to the Court's approval, that:

1. The Parties stipulate and agree that at trial and in the special verdict forms, the Parties may refer to each set of Defendants or former co-Defendants from a single corporate family by using a single corporate family name (e.g., "Samsung" as a collective reference to both Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc.). The Parties, however, reserve the right to present testimony and argument that distinguishes between members of a particular corporate family, as may be necessary at trial.

2. The Parties further stipulate and agree that, in the event of a jury verdict awarding damages, Defendants will be entitled to a setoff (i.e., a reduction) based on prior settlements. The nature and amounts of such setoffs shall be determined by the Court post-verdict and pre-judgment.

Dated: December 28, 2010 Respectfully submitted,

SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP By: MICHAEL W. SCARBOROUGH Attorneys for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY By: STEVEN N. WILLIAMS Attorneys for Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL & MASON LLP By: CHRISTOPHER MICHELETTI Attorneys for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs MAYER BROWN LLP By: LEE RUBIN Attorneys for Cypress Semiconductor, Inc.

I, Michael W. Scarborough, hereby attest, pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, that the concurrence to the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory hereto.

MICHAEL W. SCARBOROUGH

IT IS SO ORDERED

20110103

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.