Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

April 26, 2013

IN RE OPTICAL DISK DRIVE PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION This document relates to: ALL ACTIONS

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, SHANA E. SCARLETT, Jeff D. Friedman (173886), Berkeley, CA,

Steve W. Berman (Pro Hac Vice), George W. Sampson (Pro Hac Vice), HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Seattle, WA,

Lee Gordon SBN (174168), HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Pasadena, CA, Interim Lead Counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs.

SAVERI & SAVERI. INC., GUIDO SAVERI, R. Alexander Saveri (173102, Cadio Zirpoli (179108), San Francisco, CA, Interim Lead Counsel for Direct Purchaser Class.

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP, BELINDA S LEE, San Francisco, CA, Counsel for Defendants, TOSHIBA CORP; TOSHIBA SAMSUNG STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CORP.; and TOSHIBA SAMSUNG STORAGE TECHNOLOGY KOREA CORP.

DLA PIPER LLP, DAVID H. BAMBERGER, Washington, DC, Counsel for Defendants, EAC CORPORATION TEAC AMERICA INC.

BAKER BOTTS L.L.P., JOHN TALADAY Washington, DC, Counsel for Defendants, KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. LITE-ON IT CORPORATION PHILIPS & LITE-ON DIGITAL SOLUTIONS CORP. PHILIPS & LITE-ON DIGITAL SOLUTIONS USA, INC.

VINSON & ELKINS LLP, MATTHEW J. JACOBS, San Francisco, CA, Counsel for Defendant, HITACHI, LTD.

ROPES & GRAY LLP, MICHELLE VISSER, San Francisco, CA, Counsels for Defendants, HITACHI-LG DATA STORAGE, INC., HITACHI-LG DATA STORAGE KOREA, INC.

EIMER STAHL LLP, VANESSA G. JACOBSEN Chicago, IL, Counsel for Defendant, LG ELECTRONICS, INC. LG ELECTRONICS USA, INC.

BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP, JOHN F. COVE, JR., Oakland, CA, Counsel for Defendants, SONY CORPORATION, SONY OPTIARC AMERICA, INC., SONY OPTIARC, INC.

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP, IAN SIMMONS, Washington, DC, Counsel for Defendant, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP, JOEL B. KLEINMAN, Washington, DC, Counsel for Defendants, BENQ CORPORATION, BENQ AMERICA CORP.

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP, ROBERT B. PRINGLE, Paul R. Griffin, Jonathan E. Swartz, San Francisco, CA, Counsels for Defendant, NEC CORPORATION.

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP, JEFFREY L. KESSLER, New York, NY, Counsel for Defendants, PANASONIC CORPORATION, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA.

NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE & QUIGG LLP, MINDA R. SCHECHTER, Los Angeles, CA, Counsel for Defendants, QUANTA STORAGE INC. QUANTA STORAGE AMERICA INC.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINTS

RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.

WHEREAS, the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Direct Purchaser Class Action Complaint ("DP-SAC") on September 23, 2011;

WHEREAS, the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs filed a Corrected Second Amended Class Action Complaint ("IP-SAC") on October 18, 2011;

WHEREAS, following the Court's Order Denying Motions to Dismiss (Apr. 19, 2012, Dkt. 531), Defendants filed their individual Answers to the DP-SAC and IP-SAC between June 4 and August 17, 2012;

WHEREAS, on March 11, 2013, the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Leave to File Third Consolidated Direct Purchaser Class Action Complaint (Dkt. 782), with a copy of their proposed third amended complaint attached;

WHEREAS, on March 25, 2013, certain Defendants filed a Statement of NonOpposition to the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Consolidated Direct Purchaser Class Action Complaint (Dkt. 806);

WHEREAS, on April 15, 2013, the Court entered an Order Granting Motion for Leave to File A Third Consolidated Direct Purchaser Class Action Complaint (Dkt. 834);

WHEREAS, on April 17, 2013, the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs filed their Third Consolidated Direct Purchaser Class Action Complaint ("DP-TAC") (Dkt. 839);

WHEREAS, on March 14, 2013, the Court entered an Order to Amend Complaint and Voluntary Dismissal of Certain Class Representatives, pursuant to which the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs were permitted to file a Third Amended Complaint, for the purpose of making substitutions of certain proposed class representatives;

WHEREAS, on March 15, 2013, the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs lodged under seal a copy of their [Proposed] Third Amended Complaint, and then filed (i) a redacted version of their Third Amended Class Action Complaint ("IP-TAC") on April 15, 2013 (Dkt. 832) and (ii) an under seal version of the IP-TAC on April 25, 2013 (Dkt. 848);

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that, given the substantial overlap and nature of the amendments between the (i) DP-SAC and DP-TAC, and (ii) IP-SAC and IP-TAC, Defendants' previously filed Answers to the DP-SAC and IP-SAC shall be deemed sufficient for responding to the DP-TAC and IP-TAC, respectively;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the undersigned counsel for the parties, that Defendants' previously filed Answers to the DP-SAC and IP-SAC shall be deemed sufficient for purposes of responding to the DP-TAC and IP-TAC, respectively. This means that to the extent a Defendant admitted, denied or objected to, in full or in part, any allegation in the DP-SAC and IP-SAC, that Defendant shall be deemed to have admitted, denied or objected to, in full or in part, the same substantive allegation set forth in the DP-TAC and IP-TAC, respectively.

IT IS SO STIPULAted

* * *

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.