Acer Inc. et al v. Lite-On It Corporation et al

Filing 20

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' RESPONSES TO COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/18/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

IN RE OPTICAL DISK DRIVE PRODUCTS
ANTITRUST LITIGATION

CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4991-RS

13
This document relates to:
14
15
16

MDL No. 2143

ACER INC.; ACER AMERICA
CORPORATION; GATEWAY, INC.; AND
GATEWAY U.S. RETAIL, INC., F/K/A
EMACHINES, INC.

17

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
RESPONSES TO COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs,
v.

18
LITE-ON IT CORPORATION., et al.
19
Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

A T T O R N EYS A T L AW
S AN FR AN C ISC O

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Defendants’ Responses to Acer Complaint
MDL No. 2143; CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4991-RS

1
2

WHEREAS, Acer Inc., Acer America Corporation, Gateway, Inc., and Gateway U.S.
Retail, Inc. f/k/a EMachines, Inc. (“Acer”) filed a complaint on October 25, 2013 (“Complaint”);

3

WHEREAS, on January 3, 2014, this Court entered the Joint Stipulation and Order

4

Regarding Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint and Waiver of Service as to certain

5

Defendants (Dkt. 16), and a Stipulation and Order Regarding Extension of Time to Respond to

6

Complaint and Waiver of Service as to certain other Defendants (Dkt. 17), both of which set a

7

deadline of March 26, 2014 for Defendants to respond to the Complaint or, in the alternative, that

8

if Acer amended its Complaint (“Amended Complaint”), Defendants shall have until the later of

9

60 days from the date of any amendment or March 26, 2014 to respond;

10

WHEREAS, Acer intends to file an Amended Complaint in the next 30 days;

11

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that Defendants need not respond to the Complaint given

12

Acer’s intention to file an Amended Complaint, and further agree that Defendants should have 60

13

days from the date of amendment to respond to the Amended Complaint;

14

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the undersigned

15

counsel for the parties, that: (i) Defendants need not respond to the Complaint; and (ii)

16

Defendants shall have 60 days from the date of amendment to respond to the Amended

17

Complaint.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: March 14, 2014

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
By: /s/ Belinda S Lee
BELINDA S LEE
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Counsel for Defendants
TOSHIBA CORPORATION; TOSHIBA SAMSUNG
STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CORP.; TOSHIBA
SAMSUNG STORAGE TECHNOLOGY KOREA
CORP.; and TOSHIBA AMERICA INFORMATION
SYSTEMS, INC.
1

A T T O R N EYS A T L AW
S AN FR AN C ISC O

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Defendants’ Responses to Acer Complaint
MDL No. 2143; CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4991-RS

1

DATED: March 14, 2014

2

By: /s/ John Taladay
JOHN TALADAY
EVAN J. WERBEL
1299 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

3
4
5
6
7

Counsel for Defendants
LITE-ON IT CORPORATION; KONINKLIJKE
PHILIPS N.V.; PHILIPS & LITE-ON DIGITAL
SOLUTIONS CORP.; and PHILIPS & LITE-ON
DIGITAL SOLUTIONS USA, INC.

8
9
10
11

DATED: March 14, 2014

12

14
15
16

Counsel for Defendant
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO, LTD. and
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

17
18

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

A T T O R N EYS A T L AW
S AN FR AN C ISC O

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
By: /s/ Ian Simmons
IAN SIMMONS
1625 Eye Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

13

19

BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.

DATED: March 14, 2014

JONES DAY
By: /s/ Eric P. Enson
ERIC P. ENSON
555 South Flower Street, Fiftieth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Counsel for Defendants
PIONEER CORPORATION; PIONEER DIGITAL
DESIGN & MANUFACTURING COMPANY;
PINOEER ELECTRONICS (USA) INC.; PIONEER
HIGH FIDELITY TAIWAN CO., LTD.; and
PIONEER
NORTH AMERICA, INC.
2
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Defendants’ Responses to Acer Complaint
MDL No. 2143; CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4991-RS

1
DATED: March 14, 2014

BOIES SCHILLER & F
LEXNER LLP

2
By: /s/ John F. Cove, Jr.
JOHN F. COVE, JR.
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

3
4
5
6
7

Counsel for Defendants
SONY CORPORATION; SONY ELECTRONICS
INC., SONY NEC OPTIARC INC.; SONY OPTIARC
AMERICA INC.; AND SONY OPTIARC INC.

8
9
10

DATED: March 14, 2014

11

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
By: /s/ Robert B. Pringle
ROBERT B. PRINGLE
101 California Street, Suite 3900
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

12
13
14
15

Counsel for Defendant
NEC CORPORATION

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: March 14, 2014

CARLTON FIELDS JORDEN BURT, P.A.
By: /s/ David B. Esau
DAVID B. ESAU (pro hac vice)
CityPlace Tower
525 Okeechobee Boulevard, Suite 1200
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-6350
[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Hsiang (“James”) H. Lin (SBN 241472)
[e-mail]
TECHKNOWLEDGE LAW GROUP LLP
1521 Diamond Street
San Francisco, CA 94131
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ACER INC.; ACER AMERICA CORPORATION;
GATEWAY, INC.; AND GATEWAY U.S.
RETAIL, INC., F/K/A EMACHINES, INC.
3

A T T O R N EYS A T L AW
S AN FR AN C ISC O

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Defendants’ Responses to Acer Complaint
MDL No. 2143; CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4991-RS

1
2

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of
this document has been obtained from the stipulating parties.

3
***

4
5
6
7

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

8

3/18/14

HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

9
10

NY\6193841

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
A T T O R N EYS A T L AW
S AN FR AN C ISC O

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Defendants’ Responses to Acer Complaint
MDL No. 2143; CASE NO. 3:13-cv-4991-RS