Hewlett-Packard Company v. Toshiba Corporation et al

Filing 37

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS HP'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 7/18/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/18/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12
13

IN RE OPTICAL DISK DRIVE PRODUCTS
ANTITRUST LITIGATION

MDL Docket No. 3:10-md-02143 RS
Case No. 3:13-cv-05370 RS

14
This document relates to:
15
Hewlett-Packard Company,
16
Plaintiff,
17

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO DISMISS HP’S FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT

v.
18
Toshiba Corporation, et al.,
19
Defendants.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Regarding Briefing Schedule For Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
MDL Docket No. 3:10- md-2143 RS; Case No. 3:13-cv-05370 RS

1

WHEREAS, on June 23, 2014, the undersigned Defendants filed a motion to dismiss

2

plaintiff Hewlett-Packard Company’s (“HP’s”) First Amended Complaint in this action (Dkt. 32);

3

WHEREAS, on July 8, 2014, the Court entered a Stipulation and Order Extending Time to

4

File a Proposed Briefing Schedule Regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss HP’s First

5

Amended Complaint in this action, directing the parties to work in good faith to reach an agreed

6

upon briefing schedule to present to the Court no later than July 18, 2014 (Dkt. 35); and

7

WHEREAS, the parties have conferred and reached agreement on the following proposed

8

briefing schedule for Defendants’ motion to dismiss: any opposition shall be due no later than

9

September 11, 2014, and any reply shall be due no later than October 2, 2014;

10

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and AGREED, subject to Court

11

approval, that the following briefing schedule shall apply to Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt.

12

32): any opposition shall be due no later than September 11, 2014, and any reply shall be due no

13

later than October 2, 2014.

14

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

15
DATED: July 17, 2014

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

16
17

By

/s/ Belinda S Lee
BELINDA S LEE

18

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

19
20
21

Counsel for Defendants Toshiba Samsung Storage
Technology Korea Corporation, Toshiba Samsung
Storage Technology Corporation, Toshiba
Corporation, and Toshiba America Information
Systems, Inc.

22
23
24
25
26

DATED: July 17, 2014

O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP

27

By: _____/s/ Ian Simmons
IAN SIMMONS

28

1625 Eye Street, NW
1

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Regarding Briefing Schedule For Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
MDL Docket No. 3:10- md-2143 RS; Case No. 3:13-cv-05370 RS

1

Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

2
3

Counsel for Defendants Samsung Electronics Co.,
Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.

4
5
6

DATED: July 17, 2014

BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
By: _____/s/ John F. Cove, Jr.
JOHN F. COVE, JR.

7
8

1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

9
10
11

Counsel for Defendants Sony Corporation, Sony
Electronics, Inc., Sony Optiarc Inc., and Sony
Optiarc America Inc.

12
13
14

DATED: July 17, 2014

15

KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP
By: _____/s/ Mary Ellen Hennessy
MARY ELLEN HENNESSY

16
17

525 W. Monroe Street
Chicago, IL 60661-3693
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

18
19
20

Counsel for Defendants TEAC Corporation and
TEAC America Inc.

21
22
DATED: July 17, 2014

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

23
24
25
26
27

By

/s/ Jeffrey L. Kessler
JEFFREY L. KESSLER

200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

28
2
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Regarding Briefing Schedule For Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
MDL Docket No. 3:10- md-2143 RS; Case No. 3:13-cv-05370 RS

1

Attorney for Defendant Panasonic Corporation and
Panasonic Corporation of North America

2
3

DATED: July 17, 2014

4

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
By

/s/ Robert B. Pringle
ROBERT B. PRINGLE

5
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-5894
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

6
7
8

Attorneys for Defendant NEC Corporation
9
10

DATED: July 17, 2014

11

CROWELL & MORING LLP
By

/s/ Daniel A. Sasse
DANIEL A. SASSE

12
Angela J. Yu
3 Park Plaza
20th Floor
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

13
14
15
16
17

Beatrice B. Nguyen
275 Battery Street, 23rd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

18
19
20

Counsel for Plaintiff Hewlett-Packard Co.
21
22
23

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of
this document has been obtained from each of the signatories.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25

DATED: 7/18/14

26
27

HONORABLE RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

NY\6485783

28
3
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order re
Regarding Briefing Schedule For Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
MDL Docket No. 3:10- md-2143 RS; Case No. 3:13-cv-05370 RS