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

Filing 134

REPLY (re 127 MOTION Entry of a Track Two Scheduling Order and Trial Setting ) filed byT-Mobile USA Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Richard Mooney)(Folse, Parker) (Filed on 6/26/2012)

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: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

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: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Attorneys for Alfred H. Siegel, as Trustee of
the Circuit City Stores, Inc. Liquidating Trust
[additional counsel listed on signature page]

7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

8
9
10
11

Master Docket No. M:07-1827 SI
IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL)
ANTITRUST LITIGATION
_________________________________________ MDL No. 1827

12
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

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

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
DECLARATION OF RICHARD
MOONEY IN SUPPORT OF TRACK
TWO DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A TRACK
TWO SCHEDULING ORDER AND
TRIAL SETTING

28
Mooney Decl. ISO Mtn. for Scheduling Order
2319033v1/011997

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
Mooney Decl. ISO Mtn. for Scheduling Order
2319033v1/011997

MASTER FILE NO.: M-07-1827-SI

1
2

I, Richard Mooney, declare as follows:

3
1.

4

I am a partner at Bryan Cave LLP, counsel to Sony Electronics Inc. and

5

Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (collectively, “Sony”) in this MDL, and am

6

admitted to practice in California and before this Court. I make this Declaration based on

7

personal knowledge, and if called as a witness I could and would testify competently to the

8

following facts.
2.

9

In December 2010, Sony informed members of the LCD cartel that it was

10

prepared to sue them, but further informed those potential defendants that it was willing to enter

11

tolling agreements so that the parties could explore possible settlement as a means of avoiding

12

litigation altogether. Of the cartel participants to whom Sony extended that offer, all but LG

13

Display accepted.
3.

14

Sony since has made specific settlement proposals to each of the “tolling”

15

companies (and to LG Display, for that matter) and, in fact, has settled with several companies

16

without the need for litigation. Sony was unable to reach agreements with a number of the

17

“tolling” companies after more than a year of effort, and therefore filed suit against AUO,

18

Hitachi, Sharp, and Toshiba in March 2012.
4.

19
20

Sony reached a mediated settlement agreement with Hannstar, but

Hannstar reneged on the agreement and Sony was forced to sue it on May 2.

21
22

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States and the State

23

of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June 26, 2012, at San Francisco,

24

California.

25
/s/ Richard Mooney
Richard Mooney

26
27
28
2319033v1/011997