Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

In Re: Tft-Lcd Flat Panel v. Au Optronics Corporation

February 28, 2011

IN RE: TFT-LCD FLAT PANEL ANTITRUST LITIGATION METROPCS WIRELESS, INC., INDIVIDUAL
PLAINTIFF,
v.
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan Illston

LLP LLP OSTETLER OSTETLER AW AW L L Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd. T T A A & H & H TTORNEYS LEVELAND C C TTORNEYS LEVELAND AKER A AKER A B B

This Document Relates to Individual Case

STIPULATION OF EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT, WAIVER OF SERVICE, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Clerk's Action Required

WHEREAS, plaintiff MetroPCS Wireless, Inc. ("MetroPCS") filed a complaint in the above-captioned case against AU Optronics Corporation, AU Optronics Corporation America, Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation, Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., CMO Japan Co., Ltd.,

Epson Electronics America, Inc., Epson Imaging Devices Corporation, Hannstar Display Corporation, Hitachi Electronic Devices (USA), Inc., Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Displays, Ltd., Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd., Sanyo Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd., Sharp Corporation, Sharp Electronics Corporation, Tatung Company of America, Inc., Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc., Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., Toshiba Corporation, and Toshiba Mobile Display Co., Ltd. (collectively, "Stipulating Defendants"), among other 6 defendants, on December 17, 2010 ("Complaint");

WHEREAS, MetroPCS wishes to avoid the burden and expense of serving process on the Stipulating Defendants;

WHEREAS, the Stipulating Defendants desire a reasonable amount of time to respond to the Complaint; and 1

WHEREAS, MetroPCS and the Stipulating Defendants believe that proceeding on a unified response date will create efficiency for the Court and the parties.

LLP LLP 12 OSTETLER OSTETLER L L AW AW T T A A 13 & H C C B B & H TTORNEYS TTORNEYS LEVELAND LEVELAND AKER AKER A A

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, MetroPCS, on the one hand, and the Stipulating Defendants, on the other hand, as follows:

1. The Stipulating Defendants waive service of the Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). This stipulation does not constitute a waiver by the Stipulating Defendants 18 of any other substantive or procedural defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue.

2. The Stipulating Defendants' deadline to move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the Complaint will be ninety (90) days from the execution of this stipulation. In 22 computing this time period, Rule ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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