From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Costco Wholesale Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Oct 13, 2011
Master File No.3:07-md-1827-SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2011)

Opinion

Master File No.3:07-md-1827-SI Case No. 3:11-cv-0058-SI

10-13-2011

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. AU OPTRONICS CORP., et al., Defendants.

MELVIN R. GOLDMAN (CA SBN 34097) STEPHEN P. FRECCERO (CA SBN 131093) DEREK F. FORAN (CA SBN 224569) MORRISON & FOERSTER llp Attorneys for Defendants EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION AND EPSON ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. PERKINS COIE LLP DAVID J. BURMAN David J. Burman Cori G. Moore Troy P. Sauro Euphemia N. Thomopulos Noah G. Purcell Perkins Coie LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff Costco Wholesale Corporation


MELVIN R. GOLDMAN (CA SBN 34097)

STEPHEN P. FRECCERO (CA SBN 131093)

DEREK F. FORAN (CA SBN 224569)

MORRISON & FOERSTER llp

Attorneys for Defendants

EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION AND

EPSON ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO

RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT

The undersigned counsel hereby respectfully request an extension of the deadline for Defendants Epson Imaging Devices Corporation and Epson Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, the "Epson Defendants"), to respond to the Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff Costco Wholesale Corporation on September 29, 2011, in the above-captioned litigation (the "Amended Complaint").

WHEREAS the Epson Defendants, jointly with other Defendants in this action, filed a motion to compel arbitration on July 25, 2011;

WHEREAS the Court entered an order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' joint motion to compel arbitration on August 29, 2011;

WHEREAS the Epson Defendants' deadline to answer the Amended Complaint is

October 17, 2011;

WHEREAS the parties desire additional time to evaluate the applicability of the August 29, 2011 order on Plaintiff's claims against the Epson Defendants; and

WHEREAS extending the time for the Epson Defendants to answer the Amended Complaint would not alter the date of any other event or deadline already fixed by the Court;.

THEREFORE, Plaintiff Costco Wholesale Corporation and the Epson Defendants, by their respective counsel, stipulate and agree as follows:

The Epson Defendants will have until October 31, 2011 to answer the Amended Complaint.

Respectfully submitted,

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

STEPHEN P. FRECCERO

Melvin R. Goldman

Stephen P. Freccero

Derek F. Foran

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Attorneys for Defendants Epson Imaging

Devices Corporation and Epson Electronics

America, Inc.

PERKINS COIE LLP

DAVID J. BURMAN

David J. Burman

Cori G. Moore

Troy P. Sauro

Euphemia N. Thomopulos

Noah G. Purcell

Perkins Coie LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiff Costco Wholesale

Corporation

Order

Having considered the foregoing stipulation, and for good cause appearing,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Honorable Susan Illston

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Costco Wholesale Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Oct 13, 2011
Master File No.3:07-md-1827-SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2011)
Case details for

Costco Wholesale Corp. v. AU Optronics Corp.

Case Details

Full title:COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. AU OPTRONICS CORP., et al.…

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

Date published: Oct 13, 2011

Citations

Master File No.3:07-md-1827-SI (N.D. Cal. Oct. 13, 2011)