From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

AT&T Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 21, 2011
Master File No. 3:07-md-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2011)

Opinion

Master File No. 3:07-md-1827 SI MDL No. 1827

11-21-2011

In re: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Document Relates To: AT&T Mobility LLC et al v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Case No. 09-cv-4997 Best Buy Co., Inc., et al. v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Case No. 10-cv-4572 Costco Wholesale Corporation v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Case No. 1 l-cv-0058 Dell Inc. et al. v. Sharp Corporation, et al., Case No. 10~cv-1064 Eastman Kodak Company v. Epson Imaging Devices Corporation, et al., Case No. 10-cv-5452 Electrograph Systems, Inc., et al. v. Epson Imaging Devices Corp., et al., Case No. 10-cv-0117 Motorola, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al, Case No. 09-cv-5840 Target Corp. et al. v. AU Optronics Corporation, etal, Case No. 10-cv-4945 TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Case No. 10-cv-3205 State of Missouri, et al. v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al, Case No. IO-cv-3619 State of Florida v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Case No. 10-cv-3517

CHRISTOPHER A. NEDEAU (SBN 81297) CARL L. BLUMENSTEIN (SBN 124158) NOSSAMAN LLP Attorneys for Defendants AUO Optronics Corporation and AUO Optronics Corporation America NOSSAMAN LLP Carl L. Blumenstein Attorneys for Defendants AUO Optronics Corporation and AUO Optronics Corporation America CROWELL & MORING LLP Jerome Murphy Liaison Counsel for Direct Action Plaintiffs STATE OF FLORIDA Lizabeth Brady Office of the Attorney General, State of Florida Counsel for Plaintiff State of Florida STATE OF MISSOURI Anne E. Schneider Assistant Attorney General/Antitrust Counsel Counsel for Plaintiff State of Missouri STATE OF ARKANSAS David A. Curran Assistant Attorney General Counsel for Plaintiff State of Arkansas STATE OF MICHIGAN M. Elizabeth Lippitt Assistant Attorney General Counsel for Plaintiff State of Michigan STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA Douglas L. Davis Assistant Attorney General Counsel for Plaintiff State of West Virginia STATE OF WISCONSIN Gwendolyn J. Cooley Assistant Attorney General Counsel for Plaintiff State of Wisconsin


CHRISTOPHER A. NEDEAU (SBN 81297)

CARL L. BLUMENSTEIN (SBN 124158)

NOSSAMAN LLP

Attorneys for Defendants

AUO Optronics Corporation and

AUO Optronics Corporation America

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING AUO DEPOSITIONS

Direct Action Plaintiffs and State Attorney Generals ("Plaintiffs") and Defendants AUO Optronics Corporation and AUO Optronics Corporation of America (collectively, "AUO") hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS a superseding indictment was returned on June 10, 2010 against AUO, among others, in Case No. CR-09-0110-SI ("the Criminal Case"), and a jury trial is presently scheduled to commence in that action on January 9, 2012;

WHEREAS on July 5, 2011 the Special Master entered an order (Dkt. No. 3025) in the related class actions cases that, among other things, permitted the class plaintiffs to take depositions of certain witnesses after the conclusion of the Criminal Case;

WHEREAS on July 14, 2011 the Court entered an order (Dkt. No. 3110) that, among other things, set a December 8, 2011 cut-off for percipient discovery for certain Direct Action Plaintiff and State Attorney General cases specified therein;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs have advised AUO that they wish to schedule and take the depositions of the following ten individuals: S.I. Jeong, Claire Liu, Rigianna Wen, Morris Wong, David Su, Jason Chien, Frank Hsu, Arthur Chen, Richard Bai and Paul Peng;

WHEREAS Plaintiff Eastman Kodak Company has noticed the Deposition of AUO pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) for December 6, 2011 ("AUO 30(b)(6) Deposition");

WHEREAS AUO has advised Plaintiffs that Morris Wong, Jason Chien, and David Su are no longer employed by AUO and that AUO is unable to require that those individuals appear for deposition;

WHEREAS David Su is currently employed as the president of an AUO subsidiary, and Plaintiffs disagree with AUO's refusal to make him available as a party witness.

WHEREAS, because of the pendency of the Criminal Case, the parties have agreed to schedule depositions to occur after the conclusion of the trial of that action;

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiffs and AUO, through their undersigned counsel and liaison counsel, stipulate and request that the Special Master order as follows:

1. The fact discovery cutoff date of December 8, 2011 set forth in the July 14, 2011 Order (Dkt. No. 3110) is extended up to and including 90 days after the date judgment is entered in the Criminal Case solely for purposes of completing the depositions of S J. Jeong, Claire Liu, Rigianna Wen, Arthur Chen, Paul Peng, Frank Hsu, Richard Bai, and the AUO 30(b)(6) Deposition, as well any depositions of (i) the six present and former employees and officers of AUO or AUOA who have previously asserted his or her right not to testify under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution and (ii) any individual who is disclosed and who is permitted to be deposed pursuant to the July 5, 2011 Order or any modification thereto. The parties shall meet and confer regarding dates, times, locations or other aspects of the depositions of these individuals. It is further agreed that these depositions may be taken, notwithstanding the numerical limitations on the number of depositions Plaintiffs are permitted pursuant to the Special Master's Order re Number of Depositions filed May 13, 2009 (Dkt. No. 983).

2. Unless explicitly stated, nothing in this Stipulation and Order is intended to modify any other Order of the Court or the Special Master, including without limitation the Special Master's Order re Number of Depositions filed May 13, 2009 (Dkt. No. 983), Order re: Deposition Protocol filed February 17, 2010 (Dkt. No. 1546), and the Order re: Pretrial and Trial Schedule filed Nov. 23, 2010 (Dkt. No. 2165 and 2165-1), nor does this order prevent any party from seeking further modifications to that or any other Order.

NOSSAMAN LLP

Carl L. Blumenstein

Attorneys for Defendants

AUO Optronics Corporation and

AUO Optronics Corporation America

CROWELL & MORING LLP

Jerome Murphy

Liaison Counsel for Direct Action Plaintiffs

STATE OF FLORIDA

Lizabeth Brady

Office of the Attorney General, State of Florida

Counsel for Plaintiff State of Florida

STATE OF MISSOURI

Anne E. Schneider

Assistant Attorney General/Antitrust Counsel

Counsel for Plaintiff State of Missouri

STATE OF ARKANSAS

David A. Curran

Assistant Attorney General

Counsel for Plaintiff State of Arkansas

STATE OF MICHIGAN

M. Elizabeth Lippitt

Assistant Attorney General

Counsel for Plaintiff State of Michigan

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

Douglas L. Davis

Assistant Attorney General

Counsel for Plaintiff State of West Virginia

STATE OF WISCONSIN

Gwendolyn J. Cooley

Assistant Attorney General

Counsel for Plaintiff State of Wisconsin

ATTESTATION: Pursuant to General Order 45, Part X-B, the filer attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the signatories.

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.

Martin Quinn

Special Master

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Honorable Susan Illston

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

AT&T Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 21, 2011
Master File No. 3:07-md-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2011)
Case details for

AT&T Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

Case Details

Full title:In re: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Document Relates To…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Nov 21, 2011

Citations

Master File No. 3:07-md-1827 SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2011)