UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION)
October 7, 2011
IN RE TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION INDIVIDUAL
ELECTROGRAPH SYSTEMS, INC.;
ELECTROGRAPH TECHNOLOGIES, CORP.
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, ET AL. 23 DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Susan Illston
KENT M. ROGER, State Bar No. 95987 HERMAN J. HOYING, State Bar No. 257495 2 JENNIFER L. CALVERT, State Bar No. 258018 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 3 One Market, Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105-1126 4 Tel: 415.442.1000 Fax: 415.442.1001 5 E-mail: email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org 6 email@example.com 7 Attorneys for Defendants 8 HITACHI, LTD., HITACHI DISPLAYS, LTD., HITACHI ELECTRONIC DEVICES (USA), INC. 9
This Document Relates To Individual Case No.: 3:10-cv-0117 SI
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]ORDER REGARDING ANSWERS TO 18 AMENDED COMPLAINT
WHEREAS, plaintiffs Electrograph Systems, Inc. and Electrograph Technologies, Corp. ("Electrograph") filed the above captioned lawsuit on November 6, 2009 ("Complaint"); Corporation, Sharp Electronics Corporation, Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba America Electronic 4 Ltd., LG Display Co., Ltd., LG Display America, Inc., AU Optronics Corporation, AU Optronics 6 Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and HannStar Display Corporation ("Stipulating Defendants") 8 filed answers to the Complaint on March 15, 2010; 9 (Taiwan), Ltd.'s ("Mitsui Taiwan") motion for judgment on the pleadings for lack of personal 11 jurisdiction, which granted Electrograph "leave to amend its complaint to set forth its theory of 12 jurisdiction" over Mitsui Taiwan (MDL Dkt. No. 3395), Electrograph filed an amended complaint 13 on September 23, 2011 ("Amended Complaint") identical to the Complaint with regard to 14 allegations concerning the Stipulating Defendants, but adding allegations regarding defendant 15
WHEREAS, response(s) to the Amended Complaint must be filed by October 10, 2011; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the 18 undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, Electrograph, on the one hand, and the 19
1. Stipulating Defendants' respective answers, filed on March 15, 2010, to the allegations 21 in Electrograph's Complaint are hereby deemed responsive to the corresponding allegations in 22 Stipulating Defendants to Electrograph's Amended Complaint shall be required. 24
25 substantively revised allegations to which a response may be deemed to be required from the 26 Stipulating Defendants, such allegations are hereby deemed denied. 27 28
ANSWERS TO AMENDED COMPLAINT
WHEREAS, defendants Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Displays, Ltd., Hitachi Electronic Devices (USA), Inc., Epson Imaging Devices Corporation, Epson Electronics America, Inc., Sharp 3 Components, Inc., Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., Toshiba Mobile Display Co., 5 Corporation America, Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., 7 WHEREAS, pursuant to this Court's order dated August 29, 2011 on Mitsui & Co. Mitsui Taiwan;
Stipulating Defendants on the other hand, as follows: 20
Electrograph's Amended Complaint and no further responsive pleading on behalf of the
2. To the extent Electrograph's Amended Complaint contains any additional or
I, Kent M. Roger, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to 3 file this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order. In compliance with General Order 45.X.B, I hereby 4 attest that Michael Lazertwitz, Christopher Nedeau, Melvin Goldman, Hugh Bangasser, Robert Wick, John Grenfell, John Chung, and Philip Iovieno concur in this filing.
/s/ Kent M. Roger Kent M. Roger Attorneys for Defendants Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Displays, Ltd., and Hitachi Electronic Devices (USA), Inc.
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation set forth above and pursuant to Rule 6-1(a) of the Civil Local Rules, IT IS SO ORDERED. 4
Dated: October ___, 2011
HON. SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.