September 30, 2013
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION, MDL No. 1827.
AU Optronics Corp., et al., State of Oregon
FREITAS TSENG & KAUFMAN LLP, Robert E. Freitas (SBN 80948), Jason S. Angell (SBN 221607), Jessica N. Leal (SBN 267232), FREITAS TSENG & KAUFMAN LLP, Redwood Shores, California, Attorneys for Defendant HannStar Display Corp. NOSSAMAN LLP.
Christopher A. Nedeau (SBN 81297), Carl L. Blumenstein (SBN 124158), Farschad Farzan (SBN 215194), Natasha A. Saggar Sheth (SBN 282896), NOSSAMAN LLP, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Defendants AU Optronics Corp. and AU Optronics Corporation America, WHITE & CASE LLP.
Christopher M. Curran (pro hac vice), J. Mark Gidley (pro hac vice), Martin M. Toto (pro hac vice), John H. Chung (pro hac vice), White & Case LLP, New York, NY, Attorneys for Toshiba Corp.; Toshiba Mobile Display Co., Ltd.; Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc.; and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP,
JOHN M. GRENFELL (CA Bar No. 88500), JACOB R. SORENSEN (CA Bar No. 209134), FUSAE NARA (pro hac vice), ANDREW D. LANPHERE (CA Bar No. 191479), PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Defendants Sharp Corp. and Sharp Electronics Corp.,
SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON. Robert D. Wick, COVINGTON & BURLING LLP, Neil K. Roman, Derek Ludwin, Washington, DC, Attorneys for Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; and Samsung, Semiconductor, Inc., PAUL HASTINGS LLP.
Holly A. House (State Bar No. 136045), Kevin C. McCann (State Bar No. 120874), Lee F. Berger (State Bar No. 222756), Sean Unger (State Bar No. 231694), PAUL HASTINGS LLP, , San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Defendants LG Display Co., Ltd. and LG, Display America, Inc., DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP.
Neal A. Potischman (SBN 254862), Christopher B. Hockett (SBN 121539), Sandra West Neukom (SBN 250389), Samantha H. Knox (SBN 254427), DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP, Menlo Park, California, Counsel for Defendants Chi Mei Corporation, Chimei Innolux Corporation (f/k/a Chi Mei, Optoelectronics Corp.), Chi Mei Optoelectronics, USA, Inc., CMO Japan Co., Ltd., Nexgen, Mediatech Inc. and Nexgen Mediatech USA, Inc., MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP.
KENT M. ROGER (SBN 95987), HERMAN J. HOYING (SBN 257495), MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Defendants Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi, Displays, Ltd. (n/k/a Japan Display Inc.) and Hitachi, Electronic Devices, (USA), Inc., MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP.
Melvin R. Goldman (SBN 34097), Stephen P. Freccero (SBN 131093), Derek F. Foran (SBN 224569), MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Defendants Epson Imaging Devices, Corporation and Epson Electronics America, Inc, HAGLUND KELLEY JONES & WILDER, LLP.
Michael E. Haglund, OSB No. 77203 (Pro Hac Vice), Michel K. Kelley, OSB No. 85378 (Pro Hac Vice), Special Assistant Attorneys General, Tim D. Nord, OSB No. 882800, Oregon Senior Assistant Attorney General, Salem, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Oregon.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING REVISED STATE OF OREGON DEADLINES
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
WHEREAS the above-captioned case has been proceeding with pretrial preparation in accordance with the Court's Order dated March 22, 2103 (Dkt. No. 7665) and the deadline for close of limited fact discovery unique to the State of Oregon case is presently September 30, 2013;
WHEREAS counsel for the State of Oregon and counsel for defendants in the State of Oregon case believe additional time is needed to complete fact and expert discovery unique to the case;
WHEREAS, counsel for the State of Oregon and defendants have met and conferred and determined that an approximate six-week extension of all current deadlines would be appropriate; and
WHEREAS an extension for deadlines in the State of Oregon case will not prejudice any of the parties or the Court because trial dates have not been scheduled for the case.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the State of Oregon and defendants' liaison counsel, and subject to the concurrence of the Court, that the State of Oregon case will adopt the following schedule:
Event Current Date (pursuant Revised Date to 3/18/13 Order) Close of limited fact discovery unique September 30, 2013 November 15, 2013 to State of Oregon case Service of opening expert reports for October 21, 2013 December 6, 2013 plaintiffs Service of underlying data and Code October 25, 2013 December 13, 2013 Service of opposition expert Reports January 21, 2014 March 7, 2014 Service of underlying data and Code January 27, 2014 March 14, 2014 Plaintiffs and Defendants to Serve Proposed List of Summary Judgment Motions (Copies to be Provided to the February 17, 2014 March 31, 2014 Court)
Plaintiffs and Defendants to Meet and Confer Over Proposed List of Summary February 17, 2014 - March 31, 2014 - Judgment Motions and Schedule for February 28, 2014 April 4, 2013 Same Plaintiffs and Defendants to File with the Court Joint List of Proposed Summary Judgment Motions and March 10, 2014 April 25, 2014 Proposed Schedule for Summary Judgment Filings Service of reply expert reports March 24, 2014 May 9, 2014 Service of underlying data and Code March 31, 2014 May 16, 2014 Close of expert discovery April 30, 2014 June 13, 2014 Last Day to File Supplemental List of Proposed Summary Judgment Motions April 30, 2014 June 13, 2014 Based Upon New Information or Issues Raised in the Reply Expert Reports Last day to file dispositive Motions May 30, 2014 July 11, 2014 Last day to file oppositions to July 11, 2014 August 22, 2014 dispositive motions Last day to file reply briefs in support August 22, 2014 October 3, 2014 of dispositive motions Last day for hearing dispositive motions September 5, 2014 October 17, 2014
ATTESTATION: Pursuant to General Order 45, Part X-B, the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the signatories.
IT IS SO ORDERED.