Nokia Corporation et al v. AU Optronics Corporation et al

Filing 18

ORDER EXTENDING BRIEFING AND WAIVING ARGUMENT ON 5/7/10 MOTION TO SERVE (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Randall Allen (State Bar No. 264067)** ALSTON + B IRD LLP Two Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 400 Palo Alto, C alifornia 94306 Telephone: 650-838-2000 Facsimile: 650-838-2001 Email: randall.allen@alston.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. **(additional attorney names on signature line) Bruce H. Jackson (State Bar No. 98118)** BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 11th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3802 Telephone: 415-576-3000 Facsimile: 415-576-3099 Email: bruce.h.jackson@bakernet.com Attorneys for Defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. and Tatung Company **(additional attorney names on signature line) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION IN RE TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION CASE NO: 3:09-CV-5609 MDL FILE NO: M:07-CV-1827-SII STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR NOKIA CORPORATION AND NOKIA INC. TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SERVE DEFENDANTS THROUGH THEIR U.S. COUNSEL AND WAIVING ORAL ARGUMENT NOKIA CORPORATION and NOKIA INC., Plaintiffs, v. AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, et al. Defendants. This Document Relates to: Case No. 3:09-CV5609 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR NOKIA TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SERVE DEFENDANTS THROUGH THEIR U.S. COUNSEL AND WAIVING ORAL ARGUMENT MASTER FILE NO. M:07-CV-1827-SII CASE NO. 3:09-CV-5609 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On behalf of Plaintiffs Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. (collectively "Nokia") and Defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. and Tatung Company (collectively "Defendants"), the undersigned counsel hereby stipulate and agree that the Court should enter an Order extending the time for Nokia to file a Reply Brief in Support of its Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3) and waiving the oral argument on that Motion currently scheduled for May 7, 2010. WHEREAS, Nokia filed its Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel in the above-captioned case on March 26, 2010; WHEREAS, pursuant to Local Rule 7-3, the deadline for Defendants to respond to Nokia's Motion was April 16, 2010; WHEREAS, with Nokia's consent, Defendants filed their Response in Opposition to Nokia's Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel on April 23, 2010; WHEREAS, the hearing on Nokia's Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel is currently scheduled for a hearing before the Court on May 7, 2010; WHEREAS, there is insufficient time for Nokia to file a Reply Brief in Support of its Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel under Local Rule 7-3; WHEREAS, the parties agree that the deadline for Nokia to file its Reply Brief in Support of its Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel should be extended through and including May 7, 2010; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that after the filing of Nokia's Reply Brief in Support of its Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel, the issues raised in Nokia's Motion will have been fully briefed; THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and agree that the deadline for Nokia to file a Repl y Brief in Support of its Motion to Serve Defendants Through Their U.S. Counsel should be extended through and including May 7, 2010. The parties also stipulate and agree that oral argument on Nokia's Motion should be waived and that the hearing scheduled for 9:00 a.m. on May 7, 2010 should be taken off the Court's calendar, subject to any further direction of the Court. STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR NOKIA TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SERVE DEFENDANTS THROUGH THEIR U.S. COUNSEL AND WAIVING ORAL ARGUMENT 1 MASTER FILE NO. M:07-CV-1827-SII CASE NO. 3:09-CV-5609 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO STIPULATED Respectfully submitted, Dated: May 3, 2010. /s/ Patrick J. Ahern Bruce H. Jackson (bruce.h.jackson@bakernet.com) California Bar No. 98118 BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 11th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3802 Telephone: 415-576-3000 Facsimile: 415-576-3099 Patrick J. Ahern (pro hac vice) (patrick.j.ahern@bakernet.com) Roxane C. Busey (pro hac vice) (roxane.c.busey@bakernet.com) Karen Sewell (pro hac vice) (karen.sewell@bakernet.com) BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP 130 E. Randolph Drive, Suite 3500 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone: 312-861-8000 Attorneys for Defendants CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES, LTD. and TATUNG COMPANY /s/ B. Parker Miller Randall L. Allen (randall.allen@alston.com) California Bar No. 264067 ALSTON + B IRD LLP Two Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real, Suite 400 Palo Alto, C alifornia 94306 Telephone: 650-838-2000 Facsimile: 650-838-2001 Peter Kontio (peter.kontio@alston.com) Valarie C. Williams (valarie.williams@alston.com) B. Parker Miller (parker.miller@alston.com) Joann E. Johnston (joann.johnston@alston.com) Lisa K. Bojko (lisa.bojko@alston.com) Donald M. Houser (donald.houser@alston.com) ALSTON + B IRD LLP One Atlantic Center 1201 West Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Telephone: 404-881-7000 Facsimile: 404-881-7777 Richard W. Stimson, Of Counsel (rick.stimson@alston.com) ALSTON + B IRD LLP Chase Tower, Suite 3601 2200 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75201 Telephone: 214-922-3400 Facsimile: 214-922-3899 Attorneys for Plaintiffs NOKIA CORPORATION and NOKIA INC. IT IS SO ORDERED this___day of May, 2010. Hon. Susan Illston U.S. District Court Judge STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR NOKIA TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SERVE DEFENDANTS THROUGH THEIR U.S. COUNSEL AND WAIVING ORAL ARGUMENT 2 MASTER FILE NO. M:07-CV-1827-SII CASE NO. 3:09-CV-5609

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?