From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litig.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 28, 2015
MDL No. 1917 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2015)

Opinion

MDL No. 1917 Case No. C-07-5944-SC

10-28-2015

IN RE: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Order Relates To: ALL ACTIONS


ORDER ADOPTING ADDITIONAL REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Court has reviewed several Reports and Recommendations by Special Master Vaughn R. Walker, United States District Judge (Ret.) addressing the parties' discovery issues. No objections have been filed, and the Court finds the reports uniformly correct, well-reasoned, and thorough. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS in full the following reports and recommendations:

1. ECF No. 3365 regarding Thomson's motion to compel discovery from DAPs;

2. ECF No. 3960 regarding Direct Action Plaintiffs' motions to compel Samsung SDI, Hitachi, and Panasonic to authenticate documents (except as modified by the Order of the Court dated September 9, 2015, ECF No. 4042, applicable only to the Direct Action Plaintiffs and the Hitachi Defendants);
3. ECF No. 4066 regarding Defendants' Motion to Compel ViewSonic Percipient Witness Depositions;

4. ECF No. 4095 regarding an order on remand from the Court of certain DAP's motion to compel a Thomson Rule 30(b)(6) deposition; and

5. ECF No. 4117 regarding Thomson's Motion to Reinstate ECF No. 3914 re: Sears' Private Label Discovery.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 28, 2015

/s/_________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litig.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 28, 2015
MDL No. 1917 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2015)
Case details for

In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litig.

Case Details

Full title:IN RE: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION This Order Relates To…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 28, 2015

Citations

MDL No. 1917 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2015)

Citing Cases

Medicinova, Inc. v. Genzyme Corp.

See ReedHycalog UK, Ltd. v. Diamond Innovations, Inc., No. 08-CV-325 PATENT CASE, 2010 BL 427587, *8-9 (E.D.…