Best Buy Co., Inc. et al v. AU Optronics Corp. et al

Filing 651

ORDER REFERRING BEST BUY'S BILL OF COSTS AND MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS TO SPECIAL MASTER QUINN FOR DETERMINATION IN THE FIRST INSTANCE (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 11/20/2013)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9

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

Case Nos. 10-4572 SI

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

No. M 07-1827 SI
MDL. No. 1827

This Order Relates to:

ORDER REFERRING BEST BUY’S BILL
OF COSTS AND MOTION FOR FEES
AND COSTS TO SPECIAL MASTER
QUINN FOR DETERMINATION IN THE
FIRST INSTANCE

Best Buy et al. v. AU Optronics
Corporation, et al., C 10-4572 SI

13

/

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Best Buy’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs is scheduled for a hearing on November 22,
2013. It also appears from the docket that HannStar has noticed its objections to Best Buy’s Bill of
Costs for a hearing on November 22, 2013.
The Court hereby VACATES the hearing and, in the interest of judicial efficiency, REFERS both
matters to Special Master Quinn for determination in the first instance. Docket Nos. 8610, 8612, 8730,
8742, 8767, and 8778.1 The parties may contact the Court’s Courtroom Deputy, Tracy Kasamoto, if
they wish to pick up the chambers copies of these voluminous materials to submit them to Special
Master Quinn.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 20, 2013
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

25
26
1

27
28

Best Buy filed an oversized reply brief without leave of Court. Docket No. 8769. Best Buy
subsequently filed an administrative motion seeking to file the oversized reply brief or to substitute a
15 page reply brief nunc pro tunc. Docket No. 8778. The Court denies the motion to file an oversized
reply brief.