T-Mobile U.S.A., Inc. v AU Optronics Corporation, et al

Filing 127

MOTION Entry of a Track Two Scheduling Order and Trial Setting filed by T-Mobile USA Inc. Motion Hearing set for 7/6/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 10, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Susan Illston. Responses due by 6/19/2012. Replies due by 6/26/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Folse, Parker) (Filed on 6/5/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 Kenneth S. Marks (pro hac vice) Johnny W. Carter (pro hac vice) SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100 Houston, Texas 77002-5096 Telephone: (713) 651-9366 Facsimile: (713) 654-6666 Parker C. Folse III (pro hac vice) Rachel Black (pro hac vice) Jordan Connors (pro hac vice) SUSMAN GODFREY LLP 1201 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101-3000 Telephone: (206) 516-3880 Facsimile: (206) 516-3883 Attorneys for Alfred H. Siegel, as Trustee of the Circuit City Stores, Inc. Liquidating Trust [additional counsel listed on signature page] 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 9 10 12 Master Docket No. M:07-1827 SI IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION _________________________________________ MDL No. 1827 13 THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: 14 Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. 3:10-cv-3205-SI SB Liquidating Trust v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:10-cv-5458-SI Sony Electronics Inc. v. LG Display Co., Ltd., 3:10-cv-5616-SI Alfred H. Siegel, as Trustee of the Circuit City Stores, Inc. Liquidating Trust, v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:10-cv-5625-SI MetroPCS Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp, 3:11-cv-829-SI. Office Depot, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-2225-SI Jaco Electronics, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-2495-SI T-Mobile U.S.A., Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-2591-SI Electrograph Systems, Inc. v. NEC Corp., et al., 3:11-cv-3342-SI Interbond Corp. of America v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-3763-SI Schultze Agency Services, LLC, on behalf of Tweeter Opco, LLC and Tweeter Newco, LLC, v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-3856-SI 11 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order 2290988v1/011997 Case No. 3:10-cv-3205-SI Case No. 3:10-cv-5458-SI Case No. 3:10-cv-5616-SI Case No. 3:10-cv-5625-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-829-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-2225-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-2495-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-2591-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-3342-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-3763-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-3856-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-4116-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-4119-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-4119-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-4119-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-5765-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-5781-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-6241-SI Case No. 3:12-cv-335-SI Case No. 3:12-cv-1426-SI Case No. 3:12-cv-1599-SI Case No. 3:12-cv-2214-SI Case No. 3:12-cv-2495-SI TRACK TWO DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A TRACK TWO SCHEDULING ORDER AND TRIAL SETTING MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Hewlett-Packard Co. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-4116-SI ABC Appliance, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-4119-SI Marta Cooperative of America, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-4119-SI P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-4119-SI Tech Data Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-5765-SI The AASI Creditor Liquidating Trust, by and through Kenneth A. Welt, Liquidating Trustee, v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:11-cv-5781-SI CompuCom Systems, Inc. v. AU Optronic Corp., 3:11-cv-6241-SI Viewsonic Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:12-cv-335-SI NECO Alliance LLC v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:12-cv-1426-SI Sony Electronics Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:12-cv-1599-SI Sony Electronics Inc. v. Hannstar Display Corp., 3:12-cv-2214-SI Rockwell Automation, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., 3:12-cv-2495-SI Date: Time: Ct. Room: July 6, 2012 9:00 a.m. No. 10, 19th Floor The Honorable Susan Illston 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 3 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION ......................................................................................... 1 4 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES ................................................................. 2 5 I. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 2 6 II. ARGUMENT ....................................................................................................................... 3 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ...................................................................................................... 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - i 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 2 3 4 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at 9:00 a.m. on July 6, 2012, or at such time subject to the Court’s calendar, plaintiffs in the captioned cases will, and hereby do, move before the 5 Honorable Susan Illston, United States District Judge, at the United States Courthouse, 450 6 7 8 9 Golden Gate Avenue, Courtroom 10, San Francisco, California, for an order directing the pretrial and trial schedule of these cases. This motion is brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and is based upon 10 the supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed concurrently with this Notice, the 11 records, pleadings and papers filed in these cases and in Master Docket No. M-07-01827-SI, and 12 upon such argument as may be presented to the Court at the hearing on this motion. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 1 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 2 The Direct Action Plaintiffs in the captioned cases (“Track Two DAPs”) submit this 3 Memorandum in support of their motion for entry of a pretrial and trial scheduling order for these 4 cases. A proposed Order re: Pretrial and Trial Schedule for Track Two Direct Action Cases is 5 6 7 submitted with the motion. I. BACKGROUND 8 On November 23, 2010, the Court entered an Order Re: Pretrial and Trial Schedule for 9 the direct and indirect purchaser class actions in the TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation 10 and for all Direct Action Plaintiffs (the “Track One DAPs”) and all State AG Plaintiffs in cases 11 on file by December 1, 2010 (the “Track One DAP Scheduling Order”). (Docket No. 2165) The 12 Track One DAP Scheduling Order prescribed all pretrial deadlines, including completion of fact 13 14 discovery and disclosure and discovery of experts, and set a trial date for the Track One DAPs of 15 November 5, 2012. While a later Stipulation modified certain of the pretrial deadlines applicable 16 to the Track One DAPs and the AG Plaintiffs (Docket No. 3110), the trial date for those cases 17 was unchanged and remains November 5, 2012. 18 19 The Track One DAP Scheduling Order recognized that other direct action cases had been and were likely to be filed after December 1, 2010 and provided that “[d]irect action and State 20 AG cases filed after December 1, 2010, will be subject to a separate pretrial and trial schedule, or, 21 22 23 if circumstances permit, will be folded into the schedule set forth in this order.” Order Re: Pretrial and Trial Schedule, November 23, 2010, at 1, n. 1.1 24 1 25 26 27 28 Subsequent to the entry of the Track One Scheduling Order, certain of the State AGs negotiated separate scheduling stipulations with the defendants, which were entered by the Court, e.g., Order Regarding Extension of Time on Deadlines in Case Schedule, December 16, 2011 (applicable to Missouri, Arkansas, West Virginia, Michigan and Wisconsin) (Docket No. 4393); Order Modifying Pretrial Schedule, February 2, 2012 (New York) (Docket No. 4750). On May 25, 2012, the State AGs of Missouri, Arkansas, West Virginia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida and New York submitted a proposed Stipulation Regarding Extension of Time on Deadlines in Case Schedule. (Docket No. 5793) That proposed stipulation states that the applicable AGs “are entering into this stipulation to finalize settlement agreements” in their respective actions. Id. at 2. The State AG cases are not Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 2 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 2 3 Counsel for the Track Two DAPs conferred for months with counsel for defendants over a pretrial and resulting trial schedule appropriate for these cases but have been unable to reach agreement. The parties appear to be in agreement over the deadlines to be included in a Track 4 Two DAP scheduling order and in the sequencing of those deadlines. The principal disagreement 5 6 is over whether these cases should be included in a single Track Two DAP schedule or whether, 7 as defendants argue, the DAPs in these cases should be separated into three pretrial and trial 8 schedules for a Track Two, Track Three, and Track Four, each separated by a period of several 9 months of more. The Track Two DAPs believe that a single schedule for these cases is 10 11 appropriate and will not result in undue burden or complication for the defendants. The proposed common schedule for the Track Two DAPs also completely moves these cases through the 12 13 Court’s calendar by the end of 2013. In contrast, defendants’ multi-track approach delays 14 resolution of these cases well into 2014 and likely into 2015. 15 II. 16 17 18 19 ARGUMENT Both the schedule and the cases included in the proposed Track Two DAP schedule are reasonable and appropriate. The pretrial deadlines and the sequencing of those deadlines generally are based on those in the Track One DAP Scheduling Order. Reasonable periods are provided for the completion of 20 fact discovery limited to the Track Two DAP cases (12/7/12), the designation of experts 21 22 (plaintiffs 9/7/12, defendants 10/12/12), the provision of expert reports (ending 6/14/13), the 23 completion of expert discovery (7/19/13), and the briefing and submission of dispositive motions, 24 to the extent any are filed. The proposed Track Two DAP schedule provides for dispositive 25 motions to be heard no later than November 1, 2013, following which the Court can enter dates 26 for the remand of cases filed outside this district to the transferor courts and for the pretrial 27 28 included in this motion and the proposed pretrial and trial schedule submitted with this motion. Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 3 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 conference and trial of the remaining Track Two DAP cases. Under this schedule, the Track Two 2 DAP cases filed in this court will be ready for trial in 2013. 3 4 The twenty-three DAP cases proposed to be included in the Track Two DAP schedule will not cause undue burden to defendants.2 There is sufficient time between now and the close of 5 6 fact discovery in December 2012 for defendants to take the limited discovery they legitimately 7 need from plaintiffs. A number of the Track Two DAPs have produced to defendants the key 8 information they need -- data on their purchases and/or sales of LCD panels and products. Some 9 Track Two DAPs have produced other documents, as well. 10 11 Expert discovery in the Track Two DAP cases also can proceed on the proposed schedule without undue complication. Plaintiffs’ expert reports are due in January 2013, and defendants’ 12 13 expert reports are due ninety days’ later in April 2013. By this point, defendants are well- 14 practiced at producing responsive expert reports in the LCD cases, having done so both in the 15 class cases and more recently in the Track One DAP cases. Further, a number of the Track Two 16 DAPs expect to designate several of the same experts as the Track One DAPs, so defendants will 17 have the added benefit of reviewing their work product and deposing them at least once before. 18 Summary judgment motion practice, to the extent it occurs in the Track Two DAP cases, 19 is easily manageable. The Court’s rulings on the numerous summary judgment motions in the 20 21 class cases should obviate or at least severely limit the need for summary judgment motions in the 22 Track Two DAP cases. Those that are filed in the face of the prior rulings can be handled on the 23 proposed briefing and hearing schedule, which spans a period of two and one-half months. 24 While new DAP cases may (or may not) be filed after the proposed Track Two DAP 25 2 26 27 28 The proposed Track Two DAP scheduling order is like the Track One DAP Scheduling Order in that it provides a cut-off date for the DAP cases to which it applies. Under the Track One DAP Scheduling Order, DAP cases filed after December 1, 2010 are subject to a separate scheduling order, or they may be included in the Track One DAP Scheduling Order if circumstances permit. The proposed Track Two scheduling order provides that DAP cases filed after the date on which it is entered will be subject to a separate scheduling order, or they may be included in the Track Two DAP scheduling order if circumstances permit. Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 4 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 schedule is entered, thus potentially requiring a track three, that is not a reason to separate the 2 Track Two DAPs into three separate tracks, as defendants desire. The Track Two DAP cases are 3 pending in this Court and capable of proceeding on the proposed schedule. Depending on when, 4 if ever, additional DAP cases are brought, they may be folded into the Track Two DAP schedule. 5 6 Even if they cannot be included in the Track Two DAP schedule, the existing Track Two DAP 7 cases should be not separated into tracks extending well into 2014 or into 2015 based on the 8 belief that later-filed cases will necessitate a third track. 9 The Track Two DAPs respectfully request that the Court grant this Motion and enter the 10 proposed Order Re: Pretrial and Trial Schedule for Track Two Direct Action Cases. We request 11 that the Court set these cases on the trial calendar at the earliest date following the proposed 12 13 deadline of November 1, 2013 for hearing dispositive motions. 14 15 Dated: June 5, 2012 16 SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. By: /s/ Kenneth S. Marks________________ 17 Kenneth S. Marks Johnny W. Carter SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 651-9366 Facsimile: (713) 654-6666 18 19 20 21 Parker C. Folse III Rachel S. Black Jordan Connors SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle, Washington 98101-3000 Telephone: (206) 516-3880 Facsimile: (206) 516-3883 22 23 24 25 26 Attorneys for Plaintiff Alfred H. Siegel, as Trustee of the Circuit City Stores, Inc. Liquidating Trust 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 5 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 CARLTON FIELDS, P.A. 2 By: /s/ James B. Baldinger______________ 3 James B. Baldinger CARLTON FIELDS, P.A. CityPlace Tower 525 Okeechobee Boulevard, Suite 1200 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Telephone: (561) 659-7070 Facsimile: (561) 659-7368 4 5 6 7 8 Attorney for Plaintiff Tracfone Wireless, Inc. 9 10 SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 11 By: /s/ Marc Seltzer____________________ 12 Marc Seltzer Steven Sklaver Ryan Kirkpatrick SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 1901 Avenue of the Stars Suite 950 Los Angeles, CA 90067-6029 Telephone: (310) 789-3700 Facsimile: (310) 789-3150 13 14 15 16 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff SB Liquidation Trust 18 19 20 BRYAN CAVE LLP 21 By: /s/ Richard Mooney________________ 22 Richard Mooney BRYAN CAVE LLP 560 Mission Street 25th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 268-2000 Facsimile: (415) 268-1999 23 24 25 26 Attorney for Plaintiff Sony Electronics, Inc. in 3:10-cv-5616-SI 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 6 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 2 By: /s/ Philip Iovieno__________________ 3 Philip Iovieno Ann Nardacci BOIES, SCHILLER, & FLEXNER, LLP 10 N. Pearl Street, 4th Floor Albany, NY 12207 Telephone: (518) 434-0600 Facsimile: (518) 434-0665 4 5 6 7 8 William Isaacson BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 5301 Wisconsin Avenue Suite 800 Washington, DC 20015 Telephone: (202) 237-2727 Facsimile: (202) 237-6131 9 10 11 12 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff MetroPCS Wireless Inc., Office Depot, Inc., Eletrograph Systems, Inc., Interbond Corp. of America, Schultze Agency Services, LLC, on behalf of Tweeter Opco, LLC and Tweeter Newco, LLC, ABC Appliance, Inc., Marta Cooperative of America, Inc., P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corp., Tech Data Corp., The AASI Creditor Liquidating Trust, CompuCom Systems, Inc. and NECO Alliance, LLC 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 7 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 CROWELL & MORING LLP 2 By: /s/ Jason Murray___________________ 3 Jason Murray Joshua Stokes CROWELL & MORING LLP 515 South Flower Street, 40th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 622-4750 Facsimile: (213) 622-2690 4 5 6 7 Nathanial Wood CROWELL & MORNING LLP 275 Battery Street, 23rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 986-2800 Facsimile: (415) 986-2827 8 9 10 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff Jaco Electronics, Inc., Viewsonic Corp., and Rockwell Automation, Inc. 12 13 14 SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 15 By: /s/ Parker Folse, III_________________ 16 Parker Folse, III Brooke Taylor SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3800 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 516-3880 Facsimile: (206) 516-3883 17 18 19 20 Attorneys Plaintiff for T-Mobile USA, Inc. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 8 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 BARLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT 2 By: /s/ Lester Houtz 3 Lester Houtz Karma Giulianelli BARLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT 1899 Wynkoop Street, Suite 800 Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (303) 592-3100 Facsimile: (303) 592-3140 4 5 6 7 8 Mark Ferguson BARLIT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT 54 West Hubbard Street Chicago, IL 60610 Telephone: (312) 494-4400 Facsimile: (312) 494-4440 9 10 11 12 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff Hewlett-Packard Co. 14 15 16 ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP 17 By: /s/ David M. Goldstein______________ 18 David M. Goldstein ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP The Orrick Building 405 Howard Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 773-4255 Facsimile: (415) 773-5759 19 20 21 22 Attorneys for Plaintiff Sony Electronics, Inc. in 3:12-cv-1599-SI and 3:12-cv2214-SI 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order - 9 2290988v1/011997 MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 3 I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 5th day of June, 2012, that a copy of the foregoing was 4 filed electronically through the Court’s CM/ECF system, with notice of case activity 5 automatically generated and sent electronically to all parties. 6 /s/ Kenneth S. Marks Kenneth S. Marks (pro hac vice) SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 651-9366 Facsimile: (713) 654-6666 kmarks@susmangodfrey.com 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 10 2290988v1/011997

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?