From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 4, 2014
3:13-cv-05372-RS (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2014)

Opinion

          JOEL B. KLEINMAN (Pro Hac Vice), LISA M. KAAS (Pro Hac Vice), DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP, Washington, DC, JAMES TURKEN, DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Attorneys for Defendants BenQ Corporation and BenQ America Corp.

          DANIEL A. SASSE, ANGELA J. YU, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Irvine, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiffs Ingram Micro Inc. and Synnex Corporation.


          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT

          RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.

         WHEREAS, pursuant to this Court's Order (Dkt. No. 1249), Plaintiffs Ingram Micro Inc. and Synnex Corporation (together, "Plaintiffs") filed their Amended Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief (the "Amended Complaint") on June 16, 2014; and

         WHEREAS, according to that Order, the deadline for Defendants, including defendants BenQ Corporation and BenQ America Corp. (together, the "BenQ Defendants"), to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint is July 31, 2014; and

         WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and the BenQ Defendants are discussing Plaintiffs' claims and the defenses of the BenQ Defendants and desire additional time to continue those discussions; and

         WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and the BenQ Defendants have agreed to a modest extension of time in which the BenQ Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint;

         NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed that:

         1. The BenQ Defendants' answer or other response to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint may be filed on or before September 1, 2014, and

         2. This extension does not affect the deadline for any other Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the BenQ Defendants and Plaintiffs have caused this Stipulation to be executed by their duly authorized representatives.

         PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

In re Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 4, 2014
3:13-cv-05372-RS (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2014)
Case details for

In re Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation

Case Details

Full title:IN RE OPTICAL DISK DRIVE PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. v. LG Electronics…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 4, 2014

Citations

3:13-cv-05372-RS (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2014)