Bui et al v. NYK Line (North America) Inc. et al

Filing 7

STIPULATION AND ORDER re #6 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Extend Time filed by Nicholas Letourneau, Tiffany Bui. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on September 3, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/3/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 Daniel C .Girard (SBN: 114826) Dena C. Sharp (SBN: 245869) Adam E. Polk (SBN: 273000) Scott M. Grzenczyk (SBN: 279309) GIRARD GIBBS LLP 601 California Sreet, 14th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 Email: dcg@girardgibs.com 7 8 Counsel for Plaintiffs Tiffany Bui and Nicholas Letourneau 9 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 TIFFANY BUI and NICHOLAS LETOURNEAU Individually and on Behalf of and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. NYK LINE (NORTH AMERICA) INC.; NIPPON YUSEN KABUSHIKI KAISHA; WILH. WILHELMSEN HOLDING ASA, WILH. WILHELMSEN ASA, MITSUI O.S.K. LINES. LTD.; KAWASAKI KISEN KAISHA, LTD.; “K” LINE AMERICA, INC.; EUKOR CAR CARRIERS INC.; WALLENIUS WILHELMSEN LOGISTICS AS; WILH. WILHELMSEN ASA; WALLENIUS WILHELMSEN LOGISTICS AMERICAS LLC; WALLENIUS LINES AB, COMPAÑÍA SUD AMERICANA DE VAPORES, S.A.; TOYOFUJI SHIPPING CO., LTD.; AND NISSAN MOTOR CAR CARRIER CO., LTD., Defendants. ) ) JST ) ) Case No.: 3:13-cv-03516-JCS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 26 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs have filed a complaint on behalf of indirect purchasers of 27 vehicle carrier services against a number of defendants alleging violations of Section 1 of the 28 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 1 Sherman Act and various state laws in connection with sales of vehicle carrier services (the 2 “Complaint”); 3 WHEREAS, several related civil actions have been filed in District Courts across 4 the country, including F. Ruggiero & Sons, Inc., et al. v. NYK Line (North America) Inc. et al., No. 5 2:13-cv-00016-ES-SCM (D.N.J. May 24, 2013); Nelson v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 6 3:13-cv-00604-HLA-MCR (M.D. Fla. May 24, 2013); MacQuarrie, et al. v. Nippon Yusen 7 Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 3:13-cv-2409-JST (N.D. Cal. May 28, 2013); Knudson v. NYK Line (North 8 America), Inc., No. 2:13-cv-03485-ES-SCM (D.N.J. June 5, 2013); Schroeder v. Nippon Yusen 9 Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 3:13-cv-01319-DHB (S.D. Cal. June 6, 2013); Adame v. Nippon Yusen 10 Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 3:13-cv-00651-HAL-JBT (M.D. Fla. June 6, 2013); Martens Cars of 11 Wash., Inc., et al. v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 3:13-cv-02696-EDL (N.D. Cal. June 12, 12 2013); Levis, et al. v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha, et al., No. 3:13-cv-02895-NC (N.D. Cal. 13 June 24, 2013); Spicer et al. v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha, et al., No. 3:13-cv-02894-DMR 14 (N.D. Cal. June 24, 20133); Stasik v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki et al., No. 13-cv-1467-LAB-BLM 15 (S.D. Cal. June 25, 2013); and it is possible that other such related actions will continue to be filed 16 (collectively, the “Related Actions”); 17 WHEREAS, on June 13, 2013, a Motion for Consolidation and Transfer under 18 28 U.S.C. section 1407 was filed before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the “JPML”) 19 for transfer and consolidation and/or coordination of several of the Related Actions, and Plaintiffs 20 and Defendants in the Related Actions expect that a consolidated amended complaint (“CAC”) 21 will be filed in this action following an order of the JPML; 22 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendants in the Related Actions have entered into a 23 stipulation dated July 3, 2013, a copy of which is annexed as Exhibit A, extending Defendants’ 24 time to move or answer or otherwise respond to the complaints in the Related Actions or the CAC; 25 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs in this case desire to join that stipulation and extend the 26 deadlines in this case in accordance with its terms; 27 28 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned, that: –2– STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 1 1. Subject to paragraph 4 below, the Stipulating Defendants shall have no obligation 2 to respond to the Complaints in the Related Actions until after the JPML has entered an order in 3 connection with the motion for transfer and consolidation and/or coordination. 4 2. If any of the Related Actions are consolidated and/or coordinated for pretrial 5 proceedings, the Stipulating Defendants shall, as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12, answer, move, or 6 otherwise respond to the CAC that consolidates this action and any Related Actions within 45 days 7 after a CAC is filed, unless the transferee court sets a different schedule. In the event the Plaintiffs 8 serve notice that they will not file a CAC, then the Stipulating Defendants will have 45 days from 9 the date of the notice to respond to the Complaints. 10 3. If any of the Related Actions are not consolidated and/or coordinated for pretrial 11 proceedings, the Stipulating Defendants shall, as permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12, answer, move, or 12 otherwise respond to the Complaints within 45 days after entry of any such order. 13 4. Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), above, if any Stipulating Defendant 14 responds to any discovery request, participates in any meet and confer, files an answer, moves, 15 and/or otherwise responds pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 in any of the Related Actions before the 16 date required by this Stipulation, that Stipulating Defendant will serve Plaintiffs with discovery, 17 meet and confer, answer, move, and/or otherwise respond concurrently in any Related Action, 18 unless such action has not been filed with a court for 21 days, in which case the Stipulating 19 Defendant will serve Plaintiffs with discovery, meet and confer, answer, move, and/or otherwise 20 respond within the time required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in that action. 21 5. Defendants do not waive: (a) any jurisdictional defenses that may be available 22 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12; (b) any affirmative defenses under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8; (c) any other 23 statutory or common law defenses that may be available to the Stipulating Defendants in any of the 24 Related Actions; or (d) any right to seek or oppose any reassignment, transfer, or consolidation 25 alternatives with respect to any of the Related Actions. The Stipulating Defendants expressly 26 reserve their rights to raise any such defenses (or any other defense) in response to either the extant 27 complaints or any amended and/or consolidated complaint that may be in any of the Related 28 Actions. Nothing herein shall be construed as an acknowledgment of service of process, a waiver –3– STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 1 of objections to service of process, or an appearance by any defendant in any of the Related 2 Actions. 3 6. Plaintiffs’ obligations to serve a copy of the complaint on Defendants shall not 4 begin to run until the filing of the CAC (or any other date set by the transferee court) or the date 5 the JPML denies transfer. 6 7. Plaintiffs further agree that this Stipulation is available, without further stipulation, 7 to all other named defendants who notify the Plaintiffs in writing of their intention to join this 8 Stipulation (such defendants will become a Stipulating Defendant). 9 8. The undersigned, in accordance with Local Rule 5-5(a)(1), hereby acknowledge 10 service of this Stipulation. The undersigned parties agree that until they have made an appearance 11 in this matter and registered for notifications via ECF, they agree to accept service of documents 12 other than the complaint via electronic mail at the addresses listed below. 13 9. Nothing in this Stipulation shall preclude Plaintiffs or the Defendants from seeking 14 to amend the filing deadlines set forth herein. 15 Dated: August 29, 2013 By: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Counsel for Plaintiffs Tiffany Bui and Nicholas Letourneau 23 24 25 26 27 28 /s/ Dena C. Sharp Daniel C .Girard (SBN: 114826) Dena C. Sharp (SBN: 245869) Adam E. Polk (SBN: 273000) Scott M. Grzenczyk (SBN: 279309) GIRARD GIBBS LLP 601 California Street, 14th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 Email: dcg@girardgibbs.com COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS: WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LLP CLEARY GOTTLIEB STEEN & HAMILTON LLP By: /s/ Steven F. Cherry By: /s/ Jeremy Calsyn Steven F. Cherry Jeremy Calsyn –4– STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 1 2 3 4 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 663-6321 Counsel for Defendant Compania Sud Americana de Vapores, S.A. 5 6 Mark W. Nelson 2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Telephone: (202) 974-1500 Counsel for Defendants “K” Line America, Inc. and Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. ARNOLD & PORTER LLP BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP By: /s/ James L. Cooper By: /s/ John R. Fornaciari 7 8 9 10 11 12 James L. Cooper Danielle M. Garten 555 Twelfth Street, NW Washington, DC 20004-1206 Telephone: (202) 942-5014 John R. Fornaciari 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone: (202) 861-1612 Counsel for Defendants NYK Line (North America) Inc. and Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha 14 Counsel for Defendants Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., Nissan Motor Car Carrier Co., Ltd. 15 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP By: /s/ Scott A. Stempel______ By: /s/ Steven M. Edwards 13 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Scott A. Stempel J. Clayton Everett, Jr. 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20004-2541 Telephone: (202) 739-3000 Counsel for Defendant Toyofuji Shipping Co., Ltd. Steven M. Edwards Megan Dixon 875 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 918-3506 Counsel for Defendants Wilh. Wilhelmsen Holding ASA, Wilh. Wilhelmsen ASA, Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics AS, Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics Americas LLC, Wallenius Lines AB, EUKOR Car Carriers Inc. 26 27 28 –5– STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME 1 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: 3 Dated: September 3, 2013 5 13 S ER H 12 n J u d ge J o RT 11 R NIA S . Ti ga r FO 10 ERED LI 9 ORD T IS SO I RT U O 8 S DISTRICT TE C TA NO 7 SO ORDERED: UNIT ED 6 A 4 N F D IS T IC T O R C 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 –6– STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME

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?