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
Jun 18, 2014
Base 3:10-md-02143 RS (N.D. Cal. Jun. 18, 2014)

Opinion

          Keith A. Walter, Jr. (admitted Pro Hac Vice) DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP, Wilmington, Delaware.

          Minda R. Schechter, NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Defendants, QUANTA STORAGE INC. and QUANTA STORAGE AMERICA, INC.

          Lizabeth A. Brady, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, ANTITRUST DIVISION, The Capitol, PL-01, Tallahassee, FL, For the State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs.

          Nicholas J. Weilhammer, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA. Tallahassee, FL, Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Florida.


          ORDER STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR QUANTA STORAGE, INC. AND QUANTA STORAGE AMERICA, INC. TO RESPOND TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA'S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

          RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.

         WHEREAS, on April 21, 2014, this Court entered an Order directing that the State of Florida shall have until May 19, 2014, to file a second amended complaint and that defendants shall file responses to the State of Florida's second amended complaint on or before June 18, 2014 (Dkt. No. 1216);

         WHEREAS, on May 19, 2014, the State of Florida filed its Second Amended Complaint ("Florida's Second Amended Complaint");

         WHEREAS, defendants Quanta Storage, Inc. and Quanta Storage America, Inc. ("the Quanta Defendants") response to Florida's Second Amended Complaint is currently due on June, 18, 2014;

         WHEREAS the Quanta Defendants seek a one week extension of time in which to respond to the State of Florida's second amended complaint because counsel of record Keith A. Walter, Zhun Lu, and Curt Lambert have recently changed law firms from Novak Druce Connolly Bove + Quigg LLP to Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, which has encumbered the preparation and review of the Quanta Defendants' responsive pleading;

         WHEREAS, counsel for the State of Florida have agreed that the Quanta Defendants may have until June 25, 2014 to respond to the second amended complaint;

         WHEREAS, counsel for the State of Florida informed Minda Schechter, who also called on behalf of the Quanta Defendants, that the State of Florida will not seek a default judgment in view of the agreed-upon extension; and

         WHEREAS, permitting the Quanta Defendants' responses to be filed on or before June 25, 2014, will have no effect on the schedule for this case.

         NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the Court, that the Quanta Defendants' response to the State of Florida's Second Amended Complaint may be filed on or before June 25, 2014.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Quanta Defendants and the State of Florida 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
Jun 18, 2014
Base 3:10-md-02143 RS (N.D. Cal. Jun. 18, 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. HITACHI-LG DATA…

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

Date published: Jun 18, 2014

Citations

Base 3:10-md-02143 RS (N.D. Cal. Jun. 18, 2014)