UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
August 25, 2011
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) SI ANTITRUST LITIGATION PLAINTIFF,
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Brendan P. Cullen Judge Susan Illston
Individual Case No. 11-cv-02495
This Document Relates to STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING SERVICE JACO ELECTRONICS, INC., AND SCHEDULING SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP
WHEREAS Plaintiff Jaco Electronics, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint (the"Complaint") in the above-captioned case against Defendants AU Optronics Corporation; AU
Optronics Corporation America; Chi Mei Corporation; Chimei Innolux Corporation (f/k/a Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation); Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc.; CMO Japan Co., Ltd.;
Nexgen Mediatech, Inc.; Nexgen Mediatech USA, Inc.; Epson Imaging Devices Corporation;
Epson Electronics America, Inc.; HannStar Display Corporation; LG Display Co. Ltd.; LG
Display America, Inc.; Renesas Electronics America; Samsung SDI Co., Ltd.; Samsung SDI 8America, Inc.; Sanyo Consumer Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sanyo North America Corporation; Sharp Corporation; Sharp Electronics Corporation; Tatung Company of America, Inc.; Toshiba Corporation; Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc.; Toshiba Mobile Display Technology Co., Ltd.; and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (the "Original Defendants") on May 20, 2011;
WHEREAS Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on July 12, 2011, naming as additional defendants, among other parties, Philips Electronics North America Corporation 15 and Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. (the "Stipulating Defendants");
WHEREAS on July 14, 2011, Plaintiff and the Original Defendants stipulated that the Original Defendants' deadline to move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint would be October 12, 2011; WHEREAS Plaintiff wishes to avoid the burden and expense of serving processon the Stipulating Defendants;
WHEREAS the Stipulating Defendants desire a reasonable amount of time torespond to the Complaint;
WHEREAS Plaintiff and the Stipulating Defendants believe that proceeding on a unified response date will create efficiency for the Court and the parties by reducing duplicative motion practice;
THEREFORE, Plaintiff and the Stipulating Defendants hereby agree:
1. The Stipulating Defendants waive service of the First Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d). This stipulation does not constitute a waiver by theStipulating Defendants of any other substantive or procedural defense, including but not limited to the defense 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 First Amended Complaint will be October 12, 2011.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Brendan P. Cullen (SBN 194057) SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP 1870 Embarcadero Road Palo Alto, California 94303 Telephone: (650) 461-5600 Facsimile: (650) 461-5700 email@example.com Garrard R. Beeney (NY Reg. No. 1656172) SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP125 Broad Street New York, New York 10004-2498 Telephone: (212) 558-4000 Facsimile: (212) 558-3588 firstname.lastname@example.org Counsel for Defendants Philips Electronics North America Corporation and Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.Jason C. Murray Jason C. Murray (State Bar No. 169806) CROWELL & MORING LLP 515 South Flower Street, 40th floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Tel: (213) 422-5582 Fax: (213) 622-2690 email@example.com JEFFREY H. HOWARD JEROME A. MURPHY 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 624-2500 Fax: (202) 628-5116 Attorneys for Plaintiff Jaco Electronics, Inc..
I, Brendan P. Cullen, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Service and Scheduling. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Jason C. Murray concurred in this filing.
Dated: August 25, 2011
Having considered the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.