UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
November 30, 2011
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL)ANTITRUST LITIGATION
SCHULTZE AGENCY SERVICES, LLC
ON BEHALF OF TWEETER OPCO, LLC AND TWEETER NEWCO, LLC
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, ET AL.,
Paul P. Eyre Ernest E. Vargo 2 Michael E. Mumford Erin K. Murdock-Park 3 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP PNC Center 4 1900 East Ninth Street, Suite 3200 Cleveland, Ohio 44114-3482 5 Telephone: 216.621.0200 Facsimile: 216.696.0740 6 email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org 7 email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org 8 Tracy L. Cole 9 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 45 Rockefeller Plaza 10 New York, NY 10111 Telephone: (212) 589-4210 11 Facsimile: (212) 589-4201 LLP email@example.com Attorneys for Defendants Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd. and Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A.), Inc.
This Document Relates to Individual
STIPULATION OF EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS MITSUI & CO. (TAIWAN), LTD. AND MITSUI & CO. (U.S.A.), INC. TO RESPOND TO THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Clerk's Action Required
2 and Tweeter Newco, LLC ("Tweeter") filed a Complaint in the above-captioned action against 3 defendants Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd. ("Mitsui Taiwan") and Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A.), Inc. 4
WHEREAS, Tweeter, Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA, among other defendants 6 previously entered into a stipulation giving Tweeter until December 6, 2011 to file a First 7 Amended Complaint, and giving Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA until January 10, 2012 to move 8 to dismiss, answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint, (See Dkt. #22; MDL 9
WHEREAS, on December 1, 2011, Mitsui Taiwan intends to move to dismiss in the 11 amended complaint in the related case of Electrograph Systems, Inc., et al. v. Epson Imaging Devices Corp., et al. (N.D. Cal.), Master Docket No. , Individual Docket No. 3:10-cv-00117-SI 3:07-md-01827-SI (N.D. Cal.) on the grounds that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Mitsui Taiwan.
WHEREAS, Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA also intend to raise lack of personal 16 jurisdiction as a defense in the instant case. 17 18 may be relevant to the issue of personal jurisdiction in the instant case. 19 20 and Mitsui USA have reached an agreement, pursuant to Civil Rule L.R. 6-1(a), that Mitsui 21 Court rules on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss in Electrograph, in which to move against, 23 answer, or otherwise respond to Tweeter's First Amended Complaint. 24
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the 25 undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, Tweeter on the one hand, and Mitsui 26 Taiwan and Mitsui USA, on the other hand, that Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA's deadline to 27 move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint will be twenty-28
WHEREAS, plaintiff Schultze Agency Services, LLC on behalf of Tweeter Opco, LLC ("Mitsui USA"), among other defendants, on July 1, 2011. 5 Dkt. #4087.)
WHEREAS, the Court's ruling on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss in Electrograph WHEREAS, in the interests of efficiency and judicial economy, Tweeter, Mitsui Taiwan Taiwan and Mitsui USA shall have an extension of time until twenty-one (21) days after the 22 one (21) days after the Court issues its order on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss the amended 2 complaint in Electrograph. 3
Attestation: The filer of this document attests that the concurrence of the other signatories 2 thereto has been obtained.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Hon. SUSAN ILLSTON
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.