UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
June 24, 2011
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
MITSUI METROPCS WIRELESS, INC.,
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan Y. Illston United States District Judge
William A. Isaacson (admitted pro hac vice) BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 2 5301 Wisconsin Ave. NW, Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20015 Telephone: (202) 237-2727 Facsimile: (202) 237-6131 Email: email@example.com 5 Philip J. Iovieno (admitted pro hac vice) Anne M. Nardacci (admitted pro hac vice) BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 10 North Pearl Street, 4th Floor Albany, NY 12207 Telephone: (518) 434-0600 Facsimile: (518) 434-0665 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Laura J. McKay (SBN 230049) BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874-1000 Facsimile: (510) 874-1460 Email: email@example.com Counsel for Plaintiff METROPCS WIRELESS, INC. (Additional counsel listed on signature page)
This Document Relates To Individual Case No. 3:11-cv-00829-SI (N.D. Cal.)
[PROPOSED] ORDER WITHDRAWING JOINT
MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO DISMISS AND
EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO
following order to withdraw: (1) the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss directed to Plaintiff, and (2) Defendants' time to respond to the amended complaint that Plaintiff will file on or before July 8,
WHEREAS certain Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the
Complaint in this action
on June 9, 2011 (MDL Dkt #2894), and Defendant Mitsui & Co (Taiwan)
Ltd. filed a separate 8 motion to dismiss on June 9, 2011 (MDL Dkt
#2893) (the "Motions");
WHEREAS Plaintiff, although it opposes the Motions, will exercise its right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) to file a First Amended Complaint in lieu of filing an opposition to 12 the Motions; Plaintiff and Defendants, through the undersigned counsel, request that the Court enter the Defendant Mitsui & Co (Taiwan), Ltd.'s Motion to Dismiss directed to Plaintiff, and extend 2011.
WHEREAS the hearing on the Motions was originally scheduled for August 5, 2011;
WHEREAS the parties agree that the briefing dates and hearing associated with the Motions should be withdrawn and that Plaintiff will file its First Amended Complaint after the 15 existing deadline to file its opposition to the Motions;
Amended Complaint, that Plaintiff may have until August 26, 2011 to oppose or otherwise 19 respond to Defendants' response, and that Defendants may have until September 9, 2011 to reply 20 to such opposition;
may be noticed for September 23, 2011;
days from the date the First Amended Complaint is filed to answer said Complaint;
stipulate and agree as follows:
WHEREAS the parties further agree that Plaintiff may have until July 8, 2011 to file a First Amended Complaint and Defendants may have until August 5, 2011 to respond to the First
WHEREAS the parties further agree that the hearing on any responses made by Defendants
WHEREAS the parties further agree that, in the alternative, the Defendants may have 60
THEREFORE, Plaintiff, by its counsel, and Defendants, by the undersigned counsel,
1. The Motions shall be withdrawn and the briefing schedule and hearing date
2. Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint on or before July 8, 2011.
3. Defendants shall respond to the First Amended Complaint by August 5, 2011.
4. Plaintiff shall oppose or otherwise respond to Defendants' filings by August 26, 2011.
5. Defendants shall submit any replies by September 9, 2011.
6. The hearing on any responses made by Defendants shall be noticed for September 23, 2011.
7. In the alternative, Defendants shall have 60 days from the date the First Amended Complaint is filed to answer said Complaint.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Pursuant to General Order 45, Part X-B, the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this 27 document has been obtained from stipulating defendants.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.