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)
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?