UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
November 30, 2011
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
INTERBOND CORPORATION OF AMERICA,
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan Illston
This Document Relates to Individual Case No. 3:11-cv-03763-SI
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
WHEREAS, plaintiff Interbond Corporation of America d/b/a BrandsMart ("BrandsMart") filed a First Amended Complaint in the above-captioned action against 3 defendants Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd. ("Mitsui Taiwan") and Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A.), Inc. 4
WHEREAS, BrandsMart, Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA, among other defendants, 6 previously entered into a stipulation giving Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA until December 5, 7 Dkt. #24; MDL Dkt. #3957.) 9
10 amended complaint in the related case of Electrograph Systems, Inc., et al. v. Epson Imaging 11 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 jurisdiction as a defense in the instant case. 16 17 may be relevant to the issue of personal jurisdiction in the instant case. 18
Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA shall have an additional extension of time until twenty-one (21) 21 days after the Court rules on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss in Electrograph, in which to 22 move against, answer, or otherwise respond to BrandsMart's First Amended Complaint. 23
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the 24 undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, Plaintiffs, on the one hand, and Mitsui 25 Taiwan and Mitsui USA, on the other hand, that Mitsui Taiwan and Mitsui USA's deadline to 26 move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint will be twenty-27 one (21) days after the Court issues its order on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss the amended 28 complaint in Electrograph. 1
("Mitsui USA"), among other defendants, on November 1, 2011. 2011 to move to dismiss, answer or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint. (See 8 WHEREAS, on December 1, 2011, Mitsui Taiwan intends to move to dismiss the Devices Corp., et al., Individual Docket No. 3:10-cv-00117-SI (N.D. Cal.), Master Docket No. WHEREAS, the Court's ruling on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss in Electrograph
WHEREAS, in the interests of efficiency and judicial economy, BrandsMart, Mitsui
Taiwan and Mitsui USA have reached an agreement, pursuant to Civil Rule L.R. 6-1(a), that 20
Dated: November 29, 2011 2 By: /s/ Michael E. Mumford_____________ Paul P. Eyre 3 Ernest E. Vargo Michael E. Mumford 4 Erin K. Murdock-Park BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 5 PNC Center 1900 East Ninth Street, Suite 3200 6 Cleveland, Ohio 44114-3482 (216) 621-0200 (Phone) 7 (216) 696-0740 (Facsimile) email@example.com 8 firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com 9 firstname.lastname@example.org 10 Tracy L. Cole BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 11 45 Rockefeller Plaza LLP New York, NY 10111 OSTETLER AW Telephone: (212) 589-4210 T ND A Facsimile: (212) 589-4201 RNEYS ELA 13 email@example.com & H LEV TTO AKER C A Counsel for Defendants Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd. and Mitsui & Co. (U.S.A), Inc. 15 16 By: /s/ Philip J. Iovieno_________________ 17 Philip J. Iovieno BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 18 10 North Pearl Street, 4th Floor Albany, NY 12207 19 (518) 434-0600 (Phone) (518) 434-0665 (Facsimile) 20 firstname.lastname@example.org B
Counsel for Interbond Corporation of America d/b/a BrandsMart Attestation: The filer of this document attests that the concurrence of the other signatories 2 thereto has been obtained. 3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.