From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Office Depot, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 30, 2011
Case No. 3:11-cv-02225-SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 3:11-cv-02225-SI Master File No. 3:07-md-1827-SI MDL No. 1827

11-30-2011

In re: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION OFFICE DEPOT, INC., Plaintiff, v. AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.

Paul P. Eyre Ernest E. Vargo Michael E. Mumford Erin K. Murdock-Park BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP PNC Center Tracy L. Cole BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP Attorneys for Defendant Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd.


Paul P. Eyre

Ernest E. Vargo

Michael E. Mumford

Erin K. Murdock-Park

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

PNC Center

Tracy L. Cole

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

Attorneys for Defendant Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd.

This Document Relates to Individual Case No. 3:11-cv-02225-SI

STIPULATION OF EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT MITSUI & CO. (TAIWAN), LTD. TO RESPOND TO THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Clerk's Action Required

WHEREAS, plaintiff Office Depot, Inc. ("Office Depot") filed a First Amended Complaint in the above-captioned action against defendant Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd. ("Mitsui Taiwan"), among other defendants, on September 19, 2011.

WHEREAS, Office Depot and Mitsui Taiwan previously entered into two stipulations, the first giving Mitsui Taiwan, among other defendants, thirty (30) days after the filing of a First Amended Complaint to move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint, (See Dkt. #35; MDL Dkt. #3455), and the second giving Mitsui Taiwan until December 1, 2011 to move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint. (See Dkt. #44; MDL Dkt. #3810.)

WHEREAS, on December 1, 2011, Mitsui Taiwan intends to move to dismiss the amended complaint in the related case of Electrograph Systems, Inc., et al. v. Epson Imaging Devices Corp., et al., Individual Docket No. 3:10-cv-00117-SI (N.D. Cal.), Master Docket No. 3:07-md-01827-SI (N.D. Cal.) on the grounds that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Mitsui Taiwan.

WHEREAS, Mitsui Taiwan also intends to raise lack of personal jurisdiction as a defense in the instant case.

WHEREAS, the Court's ruling on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss in Electrograph may be relevant to the issue of personal jurisdiction in the instant case.

WHEREAS, in the interests of efficiency and judicial economy, Office Depot and Mitsui Taiwan have reached an agreement, pursuant to Civil Rule L.R. 6-1(a), that Mitsui Taiwan shall have an additional extension of time until twenty-one (21) days after the Court rules on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss in Electrograph, in which to move against, answer, or otherwise respond to Office Depot's First Amended Complaint.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and among the undersigned counsel, on behalf of their respective clients, Office Depot, on the one hand, and Mitsui Taiwan, on the other hand, that Mitsui Taiwan's deadline to move to dismiss, answer, or otherwise respond to the First Amended Complaint will be twenty-one (21) days after the Court issues its order on Mitsui Taiwan's motion to dismiss the amended complaint in Electrograph.

Paul P. Eyre

Ernest E. Vargo

Michael E. Mumford

Erin K. Murdock-Park

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

PNC Center

Tracy L. Cole

BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP

Counsel for Defendant Mitsui & Co. (Taiwan), Ltd.

Philip J. Iovieno

BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP

Counsel for Plaintiff Office Depot, Inc.

Attestation: The filer of this document attests that the concurrence of the other signatories thereto has been obtained.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Hon. SUSAN ILLSTON


Summaries of

Office Depot, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 30, 2011
Case No. 3:11-cv-02225-SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2011)
Case details for

Office Depot, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. (In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litig.)

Case Details

Full title:In re: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION OFFICE DEPOT, INC.…

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

Date published: Nov 30, 2011

Citations

Case No. 3:11-cv-02225-SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2011)