Motorola, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corporation et al
Filing
240
ORDER Permitting Depositions Beyond Fact Discovery Cutoff Date (4316) (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/19/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
MELVIN R. GOLDMAN (CA SBN 34097)
MGoldman@mofo.com
STEPHEN P. FRECCERO (CA SBN 131093)
SFreccero@mofo.com
DEREK F. FORAN (CA SBN 224569)
DForan@mofo.com
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: 415.268.7000
Facsimile: 415.268.7522
Attorneys for Defendants
Epson Imaging Devices Corporation and
Epson Electronics America, Inc.
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST
LITIGATION
Master File No. 3:07-md-1827 SI
MDL No. 1827
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
This Document Relates to: No. 09-5840
MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC.
Plaintiffs,
STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER
PERMITTING DEPOSITIONS
BEYOND FACT DISCOVERY
CUTOFF DATE
v.
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, et al.
Defendants.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER PERMITTING DEPOSITIONS BEYOND DISCOVERY CUTOFF DATE
CASE NO. 09-5840; MDL NO. 1827
sf-3077400
1
Plaintiff Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”) and Defendants Epson Imaging Devices
2
Corporation and Epson Electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Epson”), parties to the above-
3
entitled action (collectively, “Parties”), hereby stipulate as follows:
4
WHEREAS, the Parties have met and conferred to discuss scheduling the deposition of
Motorola’s employees Tracy Guo, C.F. Cheng, and C.M. Lai, and Epson employee Hiroyuki
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Matsuura;
WHEREAS, the aforementioned individuals are not available for deposition before the
fact discovery cutoff date of December 8, 2011;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, through their undersigned respective counsel, stipulate
and request that the Court order as follows:
1.
That the fact discovery cutoff date of December 8, 2011 be extended for the sole
purpose of the aforementioned, proposed depositions;
2.
That Defendants may take the deposition of Ms. Guo on December 14-15, Mr.
Cheng on December 20, and Mr. Lai on December 21;
3.
That Direct Action Plaintiffs may take the deposition of Mr. Matsuura at a date to
be determined outside the fact discovery cutoff; and
4.
That the Parties continue to work in good faith with regards to scheduling
additional depositions of their respective employees after the close of fact discovery. To allow
sufficient time for the Parties to coordinate with respect to any remaining depositions, the
deadline to move to compel further depositions of Motorola or Epson witnesses shall be extended
to January 31, 2012.
19
20
21
Dated: December 9, 2011
MELVIN R. GOLDMAN
STEPHEN P. FRECCERO
DEREK F. FORAN
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
22
23
By:
24
25
26
/s/ Derek F. Foran
DEREK F. FORAN
Attorneys for Defendants
Epson Imaging Devices Corporation
and Epson Electronics America, Inc.
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER PERMITTING DEPOSITIONS BEYOND DISCOVERY CUTOFF DATE
CASE NO. 09-5840; MDL NO. 1827
sf-3077400
1
1
Dated: December 9, 2011
2
3
JEFFREY H. HOWARD
JEROME A. MURPHY
JASON C. MURRAY
JOSHUA C. STOKES
CROWELL & MORING LLP
4
5
By:
6
/s/ Joshua C. Stokes
JOSHUA C. STOKES
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Motorola Mobility, Inc.
7
8
9
10
Attestation: The filer of this document attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has
been obtained from the other signatory.
11
12
13
By:
/s/ Derek F. Foran
Derek F. Foran
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER PERMITTING DEPOSITIONS BEYOND DISCOVERY CUTOFF DATE
CASE NO. 09-5840; MDL NO. 1827
sf-3077400
2
PROPOSED ORDER
1
2
Under the Parties’ stipulation set forth above, IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
4
5
6
12/16/11
Dated: _________________
___________________________
Hon. Susan Illston
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER PERMITTING DEPOSITIONS BEYOND DISCOVERY CUTOFF DATE
CASE NO. 09-5840; MDL NO. 1827
sf-3077400
3
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?