Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07588/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07588-3/pdf.json

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

---

76766.1 

W02-WEST:FMI\400155766.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS

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 

Michael P. Lehmann (77152) 

Thomas P. Dove (51921) 

Christopher L. Lebsock (184546) 

Jon T. King (205073) 

FURTH LEHMANN & GRANT LLP 

225 Bush Street, 15th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94104-4249 

Telephone: (415) 433-2070 

Fax Number: (415) 982-2076 

Email: mplehmann@furth.com; tdove@furth.com; 

clebsock@furth.com; king@furth.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JUDD ELIASOPH, on behalf of himself and all 

others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

LG PHILIPS LCD CO., LTD., et al, 

Defendants. 

 Case No. C06-7588 SI 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO 

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND 

COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS 

Judge: Hon. Susan Illston 

THIS DOCUMENT ALSO RELATES TO: 

Sorokin v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07600 SI 

Nash v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07601 SI 

Forlan v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07602 SI 

Henderson v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, 

 N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07609 SI 

Maites v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, 

 N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07638 SI 

Truong v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, 

 N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07639 SI 

Truong v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07640 SI 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 1 of 9
76766.1 -1- 

W02-WEST:FMI\400155766.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS

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 

Kerson v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, 

 N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07678 SI 

Brock v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, 

 N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07679 SI 

Rozo v. LG Phillips LCD Co. Ltd., et al, 

 N.D. Cal. Case No. C-06-07693 SI 

WHEREAS the undersigned plaintiffs have filed the above-captioned eleven cases; 

WHEREAS plaintiffs allege antitrust violations by manufacturers of Liquid Crystal 

Display (“LCD”) products; 

WHEREAS on January 8, 2007, this Court entered a Related Case Order finding 

that these eleven LCD Cases pending in the Northern District of California are related cases; 

WHEREAS at least forty complaints have been filed to date in federal district 

courts throughout the United States by plaintiffs purporting to bring class actions on behalf of 

direct and indirect purchasers alleging antitrust violations by manufacturers of LCD products 

(collectively, “the LCD Cases”); 

WHEREAS there are motions pending before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict 

Litigation (“JPML”) to transfer the LCD Cases to the Northern District of California and the 

District of New Jersey for consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407; 

WHEREAS plaintiffs anticipate the possibility of Consolidated Amended 

Complaints in the direct and indirect LCD Cases; 

WHEREAS plaintiffs and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. (“SSI”) have agreed that 

an orderly schedule for any response to the pleadings in the LCD Cases would be more efficient 

for the parties and for the Court; 

WHEREAS plaintiffs agree that the deadline for SSI to respond to the Complaints 

in the above-captioned cases and any other cases subsequently transferred to this Court by way of 

an order pursuant to the supplemental January 12, 2007 administrative motion to relate cases, or 

any subsequent order, shall be extended until the earlier of the following two dates: (1) forty-five 

days after the filing of Consolidated Amended Complaint(s) in the transferee court in which the 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 2 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 2 of 9
76766.1 -2- 

W02-WEST:FMI\400155766.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS

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 

LCD Cases are consolidated by the JPML; or (2) forty-five days after plaintiffs provide written 

notice to SSI that they do not intend to file a Consolidated Amended Complaint, provided that 

such notice may be given only after the initial case management conference in the MDL transferee 

court in this case; 

WHEREAS plaintiffs further agree that this extension is available, without further 

stipulation with counsel for plaintiffs to all named defendants who notify plaintiffs in writing of 

their intention to join this extension; 

WHEREAS this Stipulation does not constitute a waiver by SSI or any defendant of 

any other defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter 

jurisdiction, insufficiency of process, insufficiency of service of process, or improper venue; 

WHEREAS SSI (and any other named defendant who provides notice of its 

intention to join this extension provided by this Stipulation) agrees that, notwithstanding the other 

terms of this Stipulation, should it respond to any complaint in another LCD case filed in another 

United States District Court prior to the date contemplated by this Stipulation (except pursuant to 

Court Order), then it shall make a simultaneous response to the complaint in the above-captioned 

matter. 

PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT SSI, BY AND THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE 

COUNSEL OF RECORD, HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 

1. The deadline for SSI to respond to any Complaint in the above-captioned 

cases and any other cases subsequently transferred to this Court by way of an order pursuant to the 

supplemental January 12, 2007 administrative motion to relate cases, or any subsequent order, 

shall be extended until the earlier of the following two dates: (1) forty-five days after the filing of 

Consolidated Amended Complaint(s) in the transferee court in which the LCD Cases are 

consolidated by the JPML; or (2) forty-five days after plaintiffs provide written notice to SSI that 

they do not intend to file a Consolidated Amended Complaint, provided that such notice may be 

given only after the initial case management conference in the MDL transferee court in this case. 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 3 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 3 of 9
76766.1 -3- 

W02-WEST:FMI\400155766.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS

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. This extension is available, without further stipulation with counsel for 

plaintiffs or further order of the Court, to all named defendants who notify plaintiff in writing of 

their intention to join this extension. 

3. This Stipulation does not constitute a waiver by SSI or any defendant of any 

other defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter 

jurisdiction, insufficiency of process, insufficiency of service of process, or improper venue. 

4. Notwithstanding the other terms of this Stipulation, should SSI (and any 

other named defendant who provides notice of its intention to join this extension provided by this 

Stipulation) respond to any complaint in another LCD case filed in another United States District 

Court prior to the date contemplated by this Stipulation (except pursuant to Court Order), then it 

shall make a simultaneous response to the complaint in the above-captioned matter. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: January 19, 2007 FURTH LEHMANN & GRANT 

By: /s/ Christopher L. Lebsock 

Christopher L. Lebsock 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Judd Eliasoph, Arthur 

Sorokin, Joe Nash, Amy Forlan, Will Henderson, 

Jamie Maites, Henry Truong, and Stephanie 

Truong 

ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL MASON & 

GETTE LLP 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Judd Eliasoph, Arthur 

Sorokin, Joe Nash, Amy Forlan, Will Henderson, 

Jamie Maites, Henry Truong, Stephanie Truong, 

and Frederick Rozo 

STEYER LOWENTHAL BOODROOKAS 

ALVAREZ & SMITH LLP 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Henry Truong 

COHEN, MILSTEIN, HAUSFELD & TOLL, 

P.L.L.C. 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Henry Truong 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 4 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 4 of 9
76766.1 -4- 

W02-WEST:FMI\400155766.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS

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 

LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH M. PATANE 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Robert Kerson 

TRUMP, ALIOTO, TRUMP & PRESCOTT, 

LLP 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Karen Brock 

Dated: January 19, 2007 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & 

HAMPTON, LLP 

By: /s/ Michael W. Scarborough 

Michael W. Scarborough 

Attorneys for Defendant Samsung 

Semiconductor, Inc.

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, to conserve party and judicial resources, and in light of the 

proceedings currently pending before the JPML to consolidate and transfer all pending LCD Cases 

to one Court, this extension is available in all related actions (both current actions and those to be 

related in the future) to any defendant that provides written notice to plaintiff’s counsel in such 

action of this Order and its intention to join this extension, without further stipulation with counsel 

for plaintiff(s) in the related actions. 

Dated: 

 Honorable Susan Illston 

Judge of the United States District Court 

 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 5 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 5 of 9
76815.1 -1-

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

PROOF OF SERVICE 

I, Robert L. Newman, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true 

and correct: 

I am a citizen of the United States; am over the age of 18 years; am employed 

by FURTH LEHMANN & GRANT LLP, located at 225 Bush Street, 15th Floor, San 

Francisco, California 94104, whose members are members of the State Bar of California and 

at least one of whose members is a member of the Bar of each Federal District Court within 

California; am not a party to the within action; and that I caused to be served a true and correct 

copy of the following documents in the manner indicated below: 

1. STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND 

TO COMPLAINT AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED ACTIONS; and 

2. PROOF OF SERVICE. 

; By Electronic Filing: I served a true copy on this date of each document listed above 

via the Court’s ECF system on all parties registered for electronic filing in this action. 

; By Mail: I placed a true copy on this date of each document listed above in a sealed 

envelope addressed to each person listed on the attached service list. I am readily 

familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for 

mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on the 

same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I am 

aware that upon motion of a party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal 

cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for 

mailing in the affidavit. 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 6 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 6 of 9
76815.1 -2-

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

SERVICE LIST 

Allan Steyer 

STEYER LOWENTHAL BOODROOKAS 

ALVAREZ & SMITH LLP 

One California Street, Third Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Counsel for Plaintiffs Jamie Maites, 

Henry Truong, and Stephanie Truong 

Michael D. Hausfeld 

Charles E. Tompkins 

Andrew B. Bullion 

Hilary K. Ratway 

COHEN MILSTEN HAUSFELD & TOLL, 

P.L.L.C. 

1100 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Suite 500, West Tower 

Washington, D.C. 20005

Counsel for Plaintiffs Jamie Maites, 

Henry Truong, Sara Cabezas, Computer 

World Solution, Inc., and Industrial 

Computing, Inc. 

Esther Lee Klisura 

COTCHETT, PITRE, SIMON & 

MCCARTHY 

San Francisco Airport Office Center 

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Counsel for Plaintiff Crago Corporation 

P. John Brady 

Daniel D. Owen 

SHUGHART THOMPSON & KILROY, 

P.C. 

Twelve Wyandotte Plaza 

120 West 12th Street, Suite 1600 

Kansas City, MO 64105 

Counsel for Plaintiff Crago Corporation 

Guido Saveri 

R. Alexander Saveri 

Cadio Zirpoli 

SAVERI & SAVERI INC. 

111 Pine Street, Suite 1700 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Counsel for Plaintiffs Crago Corporation 

and Orion Home Systems, LLC 

Randy Renick 

LAW OFFICES OF RANDY RENICK 

The Marine Building 

128 North Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 204 

Pasadena, CA 91103 

Counsel for Plaintiff Orion Home 

Systems, LLC 

Joseph M. Patane 

LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH M. 

PATANE 

2280 Union Street 

San Francisco, CA 94123 

Counsel for Plaintiffs Robert Kerson and 

Jeffrey Figone 

Mario N. Alioto 

Lauren C. Russell 

TRUMP, ALIOTO, TRUMP & 

PRESCOTT 

2280 Union Street 

San Francisco, CA 94123 

Counsel for Plaintiffs Karen Brock and 

Jeffrey Figone 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 7 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 7 of 9
76815.1 -3-

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

Lawrence G. Papale 

LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE G. 

PAPALE 

1308 Main Street #117 

St. Helena, CA 94574 

Counsel for Plaintiff Jeffrey Figone 

Sherman Kassof 

LAW OFFICES OF SHERMAN KASSOF 

555 12th Street, Suite 1900 

Oakland, CA 94607 

Counsel for Plaintiff Jeffrey Figone 

Brian Barry 

LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN BARRY 

1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 307 

Los Angeles, CA 90067 

Counsel for Plaintiff Ari Hakim 

Robert C. Schubert 

Willem F. Jonckheer 

Peter E. Borkon 

Aaron H. Darsky 

SCHUBERT & REED LLP 

Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Counsel for Plaintiff Dr. Steven Martell 

Susan G. Kupfer 

Sylvie K. Kern 

GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 

455 Market Street, Suite 1810 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Counsel for Plaintiff Michael J. Eliav 

Paul F. Bennett 

Steven O. Sidener 

Joseph M. Barton 

GOLD BENNETT CERA & SIDENER 

LLP 

595 Market Street, Suite 2300 

San Francisco, CA 94105-2835 

Counsel for Plaintiffs Computer World 

Solution, Inc. and Industrial Computing, 

Inc. 

James B. Brown 

Jennifer A. Scott 

HERUM CRABTREE BROWN 

2291 West March Lane, Suite B100 

Stockton, CA 95207 

Counsel for Plaintiff Sarah Hansen

Steven A. Kanner 

William H. London 

Douglas A. Millen 

Freed, Kanner, London & Millen, LLC 

2201 Waukegan Road, Suite 130 

Bannockburn, Illinois 60015 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Steven J. Greenfogel 

Meredith Cohen Greenfogel & Skirnick, 

P.C. 

Architects Building 

117 South 17th Street 

22nd Floor 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Vincent J. Esades 

Heins Mills & Olson, P.L.C. 

3550 IDS Center 

80 South Eighth Street 

Minneapolis, MN 55402 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 8 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 8 of 9
76815.1 -4-

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

Harry Shulman 

The Mills Law Firm 

145 Marina Boulevard 

San Rafael, CA 94901 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Mark Goldman 

Daniel Karon 

Goldman Scarlato & Karon 

101 W. Elm Street, Suite 360 

Conschohocken, PA 19428 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Eugene A. Spector 

Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, P.C. 

1818 Market Street, Suite 2500 

Philadelphia, PA 19102 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Garrett D. Blanchfield, Jr. 

Reinhardt Wendorf & Blanchfield 

E-1250 First National Bank Building 

332 Minnesota Street 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 

Counsel for Plaintiff Art’s TV & 

Appliance

Gary L. Halling 

James L. McGinnis 

Michael W. Scarborough 

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & 

HAMPTON LLP 

Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Counsel for Defendant Samsung 

Semiconductor, Inc. 

George D. Niespolo 

DUANE MORRIS LLP 

One Market Street 

Spear Tower, 20th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Counsel for Defendant NEC Electronics 

America, Inc. 

Jerome C. Roth 

MUNGER TOLLES & OLSON LLP 

560 Mission Street, 27th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94105-2907 

Counsel for Defendant LG Philips LCD 

America, Inc.

Executed on January 22, 2007 at San Francisco, California. 

Signed /s/ Robert L. Newman 

Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 24 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 9 of 9
 Case 3:06-cv-07588-SI Document 33 Filed 01/30/07 Page 9 of 9