Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-04333/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-04333-22/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

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 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE

TIMING OF PLAINTIFF STATES’ RESPONSES TO 

CERTAIN INTERROGATORIES

EDMUND G. BROWN JR

Attorney General of the State of California

THOMAS GREENE

Chief Assistant Attorney General

KATHLEEN E. FOOTE (65819)

Senior Assistant Attorney General

EMILIO E. VARANINI (163952)

Deputy Attorney General

455 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94102

Telephone: (415) 703-5908

Facsimile: (415) 703-5480

Email: emilio.varanini@doj.ca.gov

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiffs

JAMES G. KREISSMAN (206740)

HARRISON J. FRAHN IV (206822)

ISABELLE A. YOUNG (246112)

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP

2550 Hanover Street

Palo Alto, California 94304

Telephone: (650) 251-5000

Facsimile: (650) 251-5002

Email: jkreissman@stblaw.com

hfrahn@stblaw.comEmail

iyoung@stblaw.com

Counsel for Defendants Elpida Memory, Inc.

and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C-06-04333 PJH (JCS)

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

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER RE TIMING OF PLAINTIFF 

STATES’ RESPONSES TO CLASS 

CERTIFICATION CONTENTION 

INTERROGATORIES

Plaintiff States and defendants Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc. 

(collectively “Elpida”) jointly submit this stipulation regarding the timing of Plaintiff States’ 

responses to class certification contention interrogatories.

WHEREAS, the Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton set a briefing schedule for class 

/

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 216 Filed 09/07/07 Page 1 of 6
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

2

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE 

TIMING OF PLAINTIFF STATES’ RESPONSES TO 

CERTAIN INTERROGATORIES

certification as follows: (1) the deadline to file class certification motions is October 24, 2007; (2) 

the deadline to file opposition to class certification is January 2, 2008; (3) the reply is to be filed by 

January 23, 2008; and (4) the hearing date for the motions for class certification is set for February 

13, 2008 (see April 17, 2007 Case Management Order);

WHEREAS, on June 15, 2007, Elpida served on Plaintiff States interrogatories 

relating to class certification (see Interrogatory Nos. 10-18 of Elpida’s First Set of Interrogatories);

WHEREAS, on August 6, 2007, Plaintiff States objected to and refused to answer 

such interrogatories on the grounds they were “premature contention” interrogatories (see Plaintiff 

States’ Objections and Responses to Elpida’s First Set of Interrogatories);

WHEREAS, through subsequent written meet-and-confer communications, as well as 

an in-person meet-and-confer on August 29, 2007, Elpida and Plaintiff States have had discussions 

on the timing of Plaintiff States’ responses to Elpida’s Interrogatory Nos. 10-18;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff States rejected Elpida’s proposal to defer Plaintiffs States’ 

substantive responses until 45 days before Plaintiffs’ class certification papers are due;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff States proposed providing substantive responses on the same 

date Plaintiffs States’ class certification papers are due;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff States may wish to discuss certain timing and scheduling issues 

with Defendants and the Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton, including the briefing schedule for class 

certification; 

Plaintiffs States and Elpida, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate 

as follows: 

1. To the extent the briefing schedule for class certification remains as currently 

scheduled, (i) Plaintiff States shall provide substantive responses to Elpida’s Interrogatory Nos. 10-

18 no later than October 24, 2007; (ii) such responses shall be full and complete answers with no 

new objections; and (iii) Elpida shall have 30 days after Plaintiffs States respond to move to compel 

if Elpida believes the responses are not sufficient.

2. To the extent Plaintiff States seek to modify the class certification schedule 

/

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 216 Filed 09/07/07 Page 2 of 6
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

3

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE 

TIMING OF PLAINTIFF STATES’ RESPONSES TO 

CERTAIN INTERROGATORIES

and to the extent such schedule is modified, (i) Plaintiff States shall provide substantive responses to 

Elpida’s Interrogatory Nos. 10-18 no later than the deadline for Plaintiff States to submit their class 

certification motions; (ii) such responses shall be full and complete answers with no new objections; 

(iii) Elpida shall have 30 days after Plaintiff States respond to move to compel if Elpida believes the 

responses are not sufficient; and (iv) Plaintiff States agree that defendants to this action may have 

additional time (and certainly no less time than is contemplated under the current schedule) to file 

their opposition papers and expert reports and/or conduct class discovery, subject to any limitations 

imposed by the Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton, and that Plaintiff States will work in good faith with 

defendants to reach a suitable resolution. 

EDMUND G. BROWN JR.

Attorney General of the State of California

THOMAS GREENE

KATHLEEN E. FOOTE

EMILIO E. VARANINI

455 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94102

By: /S/

Emilio E. Varanini

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiff States

JAMES G. KREISSMAN 

HARRISON J. FRAHN IV 

ISABELLE A. YOUNG 

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP

2550 Hanover Street

Palo Alto, California 94304

By: /S/

Harrison J. Frahn IV

Attorneys for Defendants Elpida Memory, Inc. 

and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc.

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 216 Filed 09/07/07 Page 3 of 6
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

4

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RE 

TIMING OF PLAINTIFF STATES’ RESPONSES TO 

CERTAIN INTERROGATORIES

ORDER

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September ___, 2007

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Joseph C. Spero

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 216 Filed 09/07/07 Page 4 of 6
Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 216 Filed 09/07/07 Page 5 of 6
Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 216 Filed 09/07/07 Page 6 of 6