"The Apple iPod iTunes Anti-Trust Litigation"

Filing 639

ORDER requiring further supplemental briefing. Signed by Judge James Ware on June 22, 2011. (jwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/22/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
NO. C 05-00037 JW

The Apple iPod iTunes Antitrust Litigation

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

ORDER REQUIRING FURTHER
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING

12
13
/
14
15

A hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification in this case is scheduled for June 27,

16

2011. On May 19, 2011, the Court denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification as premature.1

17

The Court explained that it lacked information necessary to certify the class, and accordingly, the

18

Court ordered further briefing to address the issues of how the class should be defined and the length

19

of the class period. (Id. at 14-15.) On June 6, 2011, the parties filed supplemental briefs to address

20

those issues.2 However, in their supplemental briefs, neither party provided a sufficient definition of

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

(Order Granting in part and Denying in part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment;
Denying as Premature Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, hereafter, “May 19 Order,” Docket
Item No. 627.)
2

(See Supplemental Brief in Support of Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for Class Certification
and Response to Court’s May 19, 2011 Order, hereafter, “Plaintiffs’ Brief,” Docket Item No. 629;
Apple’s Supplemental Brief Re Class Certification, hereafter, “Defendant’s Brief,” Docket Item No.
633.) In addition, on June 22, 2011, Defendant filed a Request for Leave and Supplemental Brief Re
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, contending that the Supreme Court’s June 20, 2011 decision in
Dukes has a significant effect on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. (See Docket Item No.
638.)

1

the class. Thus, the Court finds that it would benefit from further supplemental briefing on these

2

issues as well as new issues that would potentially impact the class that the Court has identified.

3

Accordingly, on or before June 23, 2011, the parties shall file simultaneous supplemental

4

briefs addressing: (1) the specific definition of the products at issue in the class period, namely

5

whether the class consists of purchasers of all iPod products (e.g., iPod Shuffle, iPod Nano, etc.); (2)

6

the geographic scope of the class; and (3) the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dukes on

7

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification.

8

The hearing on the Motion for Class Certification remains set for June 27, 2011 at 9 a.m.

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
Dated: June 22, 2011

12

JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

2

Alexandra Senya Bernay [e-mail]
Alreen Haeggquist [e-mail]
Andrew S. Friedman [e-mail]
Bonny E. Sweeney [e-mail]
Brian P Murray [e-mail]
Carmen Anthony Medici [e-mail]
Caroline Nason Mitchell [e-mail]
Craig Ellsworth Stewart [e-mail]
David Craig Kiernan [e-mail]
Elaine A. Ryan [e-mail]
Francis Joseph Balint [e-mail]
George A. Riley [e-mail]
Helen I. Zeldes [e-mail]
Jacqueline Sailer [e-mail]
John J. Stoia [e-mail]
Michael D Braun [e-mail]
Michael D. Braun [e-mail]
Michael Tedder Scott [e-mail]
Robert Allan Mittelstaedt [e-mail]
Roy Arie Katriel [e-mail]
Thomas J. Kennedy [e-mail]
Thomas Robert Merrick [e-mail]
Todd David Carpenter [e-mail]

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14

Dated: June 22, 2011

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

By:

/s/ JW Chambers
Susan Imbriani
Courtroom Deputy