Motorola, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corporation et al

Filing 94

ORDER re:STIPULATION of Extension of Time to Answer Complaint and [Proposed] Order by CMO Japan Co. Ltd., Chi Mei Corporation, Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation, Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., Nexgen Mediatech USA, Inc., Nexgen Mediatech, Inc.. (Hockett, Christopher) (tf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Christopher B. Hockett (SBN 121539)
Neal A. Potischman (SBN 254862)
Sandra West (SBN 250389)
Samantha H. Knox (SBN 254427)
DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP
1600 El Camino Real
Menlo Park, California 94025
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
Chi Mei Corporation, Chi Mei 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.

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
14
15

IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL)
ANTITRUST LITIGATION

16
17

This Document Relates to Individual
Case No. 3:09-cv-5840-SI

18

MOTOROLA, INC.,
Plaintiffs,

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

v.
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 3:09-cv-5840-SI
MDL NO. 3:07-md-1827-SI
JOINT STIPULATION OF EXTENSION
OF TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

WHEREAS the undersigned counsel, on behalf of plaintiff Motorola, Inc., filed a Second

2

Amended Complaint in the above-captioned case against Chi Mei Corporation, Chi Mei Innolux

3

Corporation (f/k/a Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corp.), Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., CMO

4

Japan Co., Ltd., Nexgen Mediatech Inc. and Nexgen Mediatech USA, Inc. (collectively,

5

“Stipulating Defendants”) and other defendants on July 23, 2010;

6
7

WHEREAS the Court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint on March 28, 2011;

8
9

WHEREAS the Stipulating Defendants desire a reasonable amount of time to answer the
Complaint; and

10

THEREFORE, Motorola, Inc., and the Stipulating Defendants hereby agree that the

11

Stipulating Defendants’ deadline to answer the Second Amended Complaint will be 14 days from

12

the execution of this stipulation, subject to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(a)(1).

13
Dated:

April 12, 2011

Respectfully Submitted,

14
15

DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

By:

/s/ Christopher B. Hockett
Christopher B. Hockett (SBN 121539)

Christopher B. Hockett (SBN 121539)
Neal A. Potischman (SBN 254862)
Sandra West (SBN 250389)
Samantha H. Knox (SBN 254427)
1600 El Camino Real
Menlo Park, California 94025
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

25
26
27
28

Attorneys for Defendants Chi Mei Corporation, Chi
Mei 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.
1
JOINT STIPULATION OF EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 09-CV-5840-SI; MDL NO. 1827

1

Dated:

April 12, 2011
CROWELL & MORING LLP

2
3
By:

4
5

/s/ Joshua C. Stokes
Joshua C. Stokes (SBN 121539)

Jason C. Murray (SBN 169806)
Joshua C. Stokes (SBN 220214)
515 South Flower St., 40th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 213-622-2690
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

6
7
8
9
10

15

Jeffrey H. Howard (pro hac vice)
Jerome A. Murphy (pro hac vice)
CROWELL & MORING LLP
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 202-628-5116
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

16

Attorneys for Plaintiff Motorola, Inc.

11
12
13
14

17
18
19
20
21

I hereby attest that I have on file written (or e-mail) permission to sign this stipulation from
all parties whose signatures are indicated by a “confirmed” signature (/s/) within this e-filed
document.
Dated: April 12, 2011

22
23
24
25

/s/ Christopher B. Hockett
Christopher B. Hockett (SBN 121539)

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
4/14
Dated: ______________, 2011
Honorable Susan J. Illston

26
27
28
2
JOINT STIPULATION OF EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
CASE NO. 09-CV-5840-SI; MDL NO. 1827