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)

Download PDF
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?