Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-md-01486/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-md-01486-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

1

Guido Saveri (22349)

R. Alexander Saveri (173102)

Geoffrey C. Rushing (126910)

Cadio Zirpoli (179108)

SAVERI & SAVERI, INC.

111 Pine Street, Suite 1700

San Francisco, CA 94111-5630

Telephone: (415) 217-6810

Facsimile: (415) 217-6813

Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs Counsel

Josef D. Cooper

COOPER & KIRKHAM P.C.

655 Montgomery Street, Suite 1700

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: (415) 788-3030

Facsimile: (415) 882-7040

Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs Counsel

Robert B. Pringle (051365)

Paul R. Griffin (083541)

Jonathan E. Swartz (203624)

THELEN REID & PRIEST LLP

101 Second Street, Suite 1800

San Francisco, CA 94105-3601

Telephone: (415) 371-1200

Facsimile: (415) 371-1211

Counsel for Defendant NEC Electronics America, Inc.,

and on Behalf of Counsel for All Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE DRAM ANTITRUST LITIGATION

This Document Relates to:

ALL ACTIONS

Master File No: M-02-1486-PJH (JCS)

MDL No. 1486

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE

DISCOVERY PLAN

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 1 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 1 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

2

On February 17, 2006, the parties, represented by their counsel of record, appeared before

Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero for a Discovery Conference. The Court, having considered the

papers filed by Plaintiffs and Defendants and the oral argument of counsel, along with all other

papers on file in this action, and good cause appearing, HEREBY ORDERS THAT:

A. BACKGROUND

There are two general categories of cases in these related actions: (1) those brought under

federal law on behalf of direct purchasers, all of which are included in a single consolidated

complaint, and (2) those brought generally under certain state laws and the Clayton Act on behalf

of indirect purchasers throughout the United States. All plaintiffs allege that they purchased

DRAM chips either directly or indirectly from defendants or from their alleged co-conspirators.

Plaintiffs sued to recover damages allegedly caused by the defendants' conspiracy to fix prices

and allocate markets for DRAM chips in the United States and elsewhere. The direct purchaser

plaintiffs allege that the conspiracy began April 1, 1999 and continued through at least June 30,

2002 (the "Class Period"). The indirect purchaser plaintiffs allege similar class periods.

On October 26, 2005, the Court entered an Order Re Coordination of Discovery. As a

result of that Order, the parties will conduct common liability discovery in a coordinated manner

on the schedule previously approved by the Court. Common discovery closes in about three

months, on May 12, 2006, with trial for the direct purchaser action set for February 26, 2007.

Discovery applicable only to indirect purchaser issues will begin in March 2006.

Consequently, the pretrial schedule for the indirect cases contains some dates that trail the dates

in the joint schedule. For example, the indirect purchaser class certification motion is tentatively

scheduled to be heard four months after the direct purchaser class hearing; indirect purchaser

discovery is proposed to close approximately five months after discovery closes in the direct

purchaser case. Defendants have reserved their right to propose, if they deem it appropriate, that

the trial on liability be a joint trial.

The following schedules have been set by the Court and are not contested. No party

hereto is asking that these dates be changed:

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 2 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 2 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

3

PRETRIAL SCHEDULE FOR COORDINATED DISCOVERY

July 14, 2005 Full discovery commences, including written discovery and depositions,

subject to the terms of the Stipulation and Order entered April 16, 2003.

May 12, 2006 Fact discovery closes.

May 14, 2006 Joint, coordinated discovery with direct purchaser plaintiffs closes. No

further discovery on issues common to direct and indirect actions, absent

agreement of parties or by order of court for good cause shown. The

parties agree to meet and confer in good faith to resolve any disputes about

whether discovery is common to direct and indirect actions.

PRETRIAL SCHEDULE FOR DIRECT PURCHASER CASES

December 9, 2005 Last date for plaintiffs to file (a) Class Certification expert report and (b)

Motion for Class Certification.

December 15, 2005 Last day to amend pleadings or add new parties, except any amendment to

(a) add class representatives in response to the oppositions to class

certification or consistent with the order of the Court, or (b) to name

additional parties consistent with any subsequent information, indictment

and/or guilty plea.

March 10, 2006 Last date for defendants to file (a) Class Certification expert report and (b)

Opposition to Motion for Class Certification.

April 19, 2006 Last date for plaintiffs to file (a) any rebuttal expert report and (b) Class

Certification reply brief.

May 12, 2006 Fact discovery closes.

May 17, 2006 Hearing on Motion for Class Certification.

May 26, 2006 Last date for plaintiffs to serve expert reports on merits.

June 23, 2006 Last date for defendants to serve expert reports on merits.

July 10, 2006 Last date for plaintiffs to serve rebuttal expert reports on merits.

July 28, 2006 Expert discovery closes.

August 11, 2006 Last date for filing dispositive motions.

September 13, 2006 Last date for oppositions to dispositive motions.

October 11, 2006 Last day for dispositive motions reply briefs.

October 25, 2006 Hearing on dispositive motions. (9:00 am)

December 8, 2006 Last date for settlement conference.

December 8, 2006 Last date for filing motions in limine and other non-dispositive pretrial

motions.

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 3 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 3 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

4

December 15, 2006 Last date to meet and confer re: pretrial order.

December 22, 2006 Parties must exchange proposed exhibit and witness lists.

December 22, 2006 Last date for filing pretrial order, agreed set of jury instructions and verdict

forms, filing setting forth status of disputed instructions/verdict forms, etc.

December 22, 2006 Last date for filing oppositions to motions in limine.

January 5, 2007 Last date for filing motions in limine reply briefs.

January 17, 2007 Pretrial conference, hearing on motions in limine.

February 26, 2007 Trial begins.

PRETRIAL SCHEDULE FOR INDIRECT PURCHASER CASES

March 1, 2006 Written fact discovery related to indirect purchaser issues may be served.

March 31, 2006 Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs' counsel and defense counsel to meet and

confer by March 31, 2006, for the purpose of setting dates for expert

reports, dispositive motions, and other pretrial matters.

May 14, 2006 Joint, coordinated discovery with direct purchaser plaintiffs closes. No

further discovery on issues common to direct and indirect actions, absent

agreement of parties or by order of court for good cause shown. The

parties agree to meet and confer in good faith to resolve any disputes about

whether discovery is common to direct and indirect actions.

May 15, 2006 Depositions related to indirect purchaser issues commence.

June 1, 2006 Last day for indirect purchaser plaintiffs to file (a) class certification

expert reports; and (b) motion for class certification.

July 14, 2006 Last day for defendants to file (a) class certification expert reports; and (b)

opposition to indirect purchasers' class certification motion.

August 14, 2006 Last day for indirect purchaser plaintiffs to file (a) class certification reply

expert reports and (b) class certification reply brief.

August 30, 2006 Class certification argument (subject to Court's calendar).

October 31, 2006 Indirect Purchaser fact and expert discovery closes.

B. DISCOVERY PLAN

1. This Discovery Plan is not intended to supercede individual agreements already

reached by the parties in the meet and confer process.

/ /

/ /

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 4 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 4 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

5

2. Dispute Resolution Procedures

Except for in an emergency, before filing any future discovery motions, the parties shall

abide by the following procedures to ensure the prompt resolution of any disputes:

a. Counsel for the parties shall first meet and confer to attempt to resolve any

discovery dispute. This may be done by telephone, e-mail, or other form

of correspondence.

b. If the dispute is not resolved in short order through the meet and confer

effort, lead trial counsel shall meet and confer in-person to attempt to

resolve any disputes. Any party may demand such a meeting on five

business days’ notice. The location of these meetings shall alternate, with

plaintiffs’ offices being the first location for any such in-person meeting,

or such other location as the parties agree upon, and with defendants

choosing the next location. 

c. If the dispute is not resolved through this in-person meet and confer, the

parties shall submit a Joint Letter Brief, not to exceed three (3) pages,

setting forth the substance of the dispute, the positions of each relevant

party, and the final compromise positions offered.

d. Upon receipt of the Joint Letter Brief, the Court will determine what

action will be taken by either issuing a ruling, holding a telephonic

hearing, or, in rare cases, requesting supplemental briefing from parties.

3. Completion of Document Productions

The following schedule was established by the Court with respect to the completion of

the production of documents in response to subpoenas and outstanding document requests.

a. Defendants’ Document Productions

All Defendants shall complete their production of documents in response

to Plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests for Production of Documents on or

before March 15, 2006. 

/ /

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 5 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 5 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

6

b. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs Document Productions

The Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs shall complete their production of

documents in response to Defendants’ Joint Request for Production of

Documents and Defendants’ Joint 30(b)(6) Deposition Notices on or

before March 15, 2006.

c. Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs Document Productions

Discovery unique to indirect purchaser issues begins on March 1, 2006. 

Counsel for the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs shall meet & confer with

Defendants regarding a schedule for the production of documents unique

to the Indirect Actions and shall advise the Court of the schedule at their

earliest convenience.

d. Production of Foreign Documents

Parties may not refuse to produce documents solely on the grounds that the

documents are maintained in a foreign location. The parties shall meet

and confer on or before March 3, 2006 for the purpose of resolving issues

related to the production of foreign documents.

4. Completion of Interrogatory Responses

The following schedule was established by the Court with respect to the completion of

the Interrogatory Responses.

a. Responses to Pending Interrogatories

All parties shall serve responses to any pending interrogatories on or

before March 15, 2006.

b. Completion of Answers for Rule 33(d) Responses

For any interrogatory response made under Rule 33(d), the Responding

Party shall provide Bates numbers to the Propounding Party on or before

March 15, 2006. The Bates numbers referred to shall, pursuant to Rule

33(d), identify documents from which the requested information can

readily be identified. The Responding Party has the option of providing a

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 6 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 6 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

7

narrative answer in lieu of providing Bates numbers for any response made

under Rule 33(d). This must be served on all parties by March 15, 2006. 

Except with respect to the application of Rule 33(d), and matters set forth

elsewhere in this Discovery Plan, other objections may be maintained and

shall be resolved if necessary in accordance with the dispute resolution

procedures set forth herein.

5. Relevant Time Period for Discovery

The following relevant time periods were adopted by the Court to govern written

discovery and document productions in these actions:

a. Discovery Period

The presumptive relevant time period for general discovery shall be from

April 1, 1998 through June 30, 2002. Parties with unique issues (e.g.

smaller grand jury periods) shall meet and confer, and, if necessary, shall

resolve any disputes through the Dispute Resolution Procedures set forth

herein.

b. Discovery Period for “Sales and Transactional Data”

The relevant time period for discovery of “Sales and Transactional Data”

shall be from January 1, 1996 through December 31, 2004. The parties

shall produce all “Sales and Transactional Data” in electronic format on or

before March 15, 2006. The parties shall meet & confer as to the precise

content to be applied to the term “Sales and Transactional Data.” 

6. Depositions

a. Deposition Topics, Witnesses, and Limitations

The parties shall meet and confer and submit a letter to the Court on or

before March 3, 2006 identifying the 30(b)(6) topics, 30(b)(6) witnesses,

and limitations on both party and non-party depositions for merits

discovery in the Direct Purchaser and Indirect Purchaser actions.

/ /

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 7 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 7 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

8

b. Deposition Locations

The Court expects, to the extent a witness has traveled to the United States

for business, or otherwise does business in the United States, generally

that those witnesses depositions will occur in the United States. However,

the parties shall meet and confer on the locations of the depositions. 

Plaintiffs shall be responsible for payment of reasonable travel and lodging

expenses for any foreign witness produced in the United States. The Court

urges the parties to meet and confer regarding the locations to resolve any

issues without Court intervention. On or before February 24, 2006,

defendants shall advise plaintiffs as to which of the witnesses noticed as of

February 17, and currently employed by a party, will be produced in the

United States. As to witnesses noticed after February 17, 2006 who are

currently employed by a party, defendants shall advise plaintiffs of the

location within one week of receiving such notices. The parties shall

attempt to resolve any dispute with respect to the location of depositions

by March 3, 2006, after which they shall follow the Dispute Resolution

Procedures set forth herein.

c. Deposition Rules

All depositions taken in the United States will be governed by the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure. For any deposition taken outside of the United

States, the parties shall meet and confer on the reconciliation of the

applicable foreign law with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. During

deposition, counsel shall not instruct witnesses not to answer except on

grounds of attorney-client privilege, work-product privilege, Fifth

Amendment, violations of this Discovery Plan, beyond the scope of a

30(b)(6) topic for which the witness is designated, or any other applicable

privilege that prevents the witness from testifying.

/ /

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 8 of 9
 Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 8 of 9
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE DISCOVERY PLAN

9

d. Fifth Amendment Depositions

Counsel for the Defendant by whom a noticed deponent is employed will

attempt in good faith to notify Plaintiffs fourteen (14) calendar days before

the agreed-upon date of any deposition if the deponent plans to invoke his

or her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination at the

deposition. The parties recognize, however, that circumstances affecting a

deponent's decision whether to invoke the privilege may change at a time

within that fourteen-day (14-day) period. Moreover, individual deponents

are not parties to this litigation and may be represented by separate

counsel. Defendants do not exercise final control over the timing of

deponents' decisions about this matter, nor do they have the power to

waive any individual's Fifth Amendment rights. In the event that an

employee-deponent's decision changes within the fourteen-day (14-day)

period, counsel for the relevant Defendant will notify Plaintiffs as quickly

as practicable of the deponent's plans. Nothing in this provision shall be

construed to affect the right of any employee or deponent to invoke his or

her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.

e. Time Limits for Depositions

All parties agree that there is a presumption that all depositions should be

taken within the allotted seven-hour time frame pursuant to the Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 30(d)(2). If a party determines that it is necessary

to expand this time frame for any reason, this will be negotiated on a

witness-by-witness basis.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: ________________, 2006 ________________________________

Hon. Joseph C. Spero

United States Magistrate Judge

Case M:02-cv-01486 Document 720 Filed 02/24/2006 Page 9 of 9

Feb. 27

Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 722 Filed 02/28/06 Page 9 of 9