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 Tft-Lcd (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation v. Epson Imaging Devices Corporation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA -- SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


June 7, 2011

IN RE TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
PLAINTIFF,
v.
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

Case3:07-md-01827-SI Document2869 Filed06/07/11 Page1 of Karl D. Belgum (CA 122752) kbelgum@nixonpeabody.com John R. Foote (CA 99674) jfoote@nixonpeabody.com Nixon Peabody LLC One Embarcadero Center, 18th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 984-8200 Facsimile: (415) 984-8300 Attorneys for Plaintiff EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS AND EXTENDING TIME TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE THERETO Date Action Filed: December 1, 2010

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:

Plaintiff and moving Defendants, through the undersigned counsel, request that the Court enter the following order to continue the hearing date and briefing dates on Defendants' Joint Motion to Dismiss, extend Plaintiff's time to file a first amended complaint, and extend Defendants' time to answer or otherwise respond to that first amended complaint.

WHEREAS Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the Complaint in this action on May 12, 2011 ("Motion"); merit, intends to exercise its right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) to file a first amended 5 complaint in lieu of filing an opposition to the Motion;

WHEREAS the hearing on the Motion is currently scheduled for June 17, 2011;

WHEREAS Plaintiff, although it opposes the Motion and believes it to be without

WHEREAS pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B), Plaintiff has until June 6, 2011 to file a first amended complaint, but pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, its opposition to the Motion is due prior to that date on May 27, 2011; dates, should be continued such that Plaintiff's opposition to the Motion is not due prior to the deadline to file a first amended complaint; amended complaint, and Defendants may have 30 days to answer or otherwise respond to a first 14 amended complaint from the date it is filed; authorized to execute this stipulation on behalf of all moving Defendants, stipulate and agree as 17 follows:

WHEREAS the parties agree that the date of the hearing on the Motion, and associated briefing

WHEREAS the parties further agree that Plaintiff may have until June 10 to file a first

THEREFORE, Plaintiff, by its counsel, and Defendants, by the undersigned counsel, who are

1. Plaintiff's deadline to file a first amended complaint is extended to June 10, 2011.

2. Plaintiff's deadline to file opposition to the Motion is extended to June 10, 2011.

3. Defendants' deadline to file any reply in support of the Motion is extended to June 24, 2011. shall be withdrawn as moot and the hearing vacated. 25

4. The hearing date for the Motion is to be set for July 8, 2011.

5. If Plaintiff files a first amended complaint on or before June 10, 2011, then the Motion

6. Defendants shall have 30 days from the filing of a first amended complaint to answer or otherwise respond to the first amended complaint.

Pursuant to General Order 45, Part X-B, the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the signatories to this document.

Having considered the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing therefor,

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

By: Judge of the U.S. District Court, N.D. California

20110607

© 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.