Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03820/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03820-6/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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

[Counsel for Stipulating Parties Listed on Signature Pages]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re Resistors Antitrust Litigation

______________________________________

Case No. 3:15-cv-03820-JD

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT 

DISCOVERY

This Document Relates To:

ALL ACTIONS

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 1 of 7
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

The parties through their respective counsel of record stipulate to the following regarding the 

scope of expert discovery in the above-captioned matters and all other matters subsequently 

consolidated with them (collectively, the “Actions”), subject to approval by the Court as required by 

the Standing Order for Discovery in Civil Cases before Judge Donato.

1. This Stipulation and Order Concerning Expert Discovery (“Stipulation”) does not set 

or alter the time for any disclosure required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) or the 

timing of any deposition of any testifying expert. The parties contemplate that they will later submit 

a stipulation addressing these matters for approval by the Court or the Court will establish a 

timetable for disclosures and depositions.

2. To the extent that this Stipulation imposes limitations on discovery that would 

otherwise be available under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or this Court’s standing orders, the 

parties have agreed to those limitations to increase the efficiency of their dealings with testifying 

experts and to minimize discovery disputes regarding testifying experts. Neither the terms of this 

Stipulation nor the parties’ agreement to them shall be considered an admission by any person that 

any of the information restricted from discovery by this Stipulation would otherwise be discoverable 

or admissible.

3. For purposes of the Actions, Rule 26(a)(2)(B)(ii) is modified to read: “the facts, data 

and other information relied on by the witness in forming them.”

4. Except as provided in paragraphs 6 and 7 below, the following types of information 

shall not be the subject of any form of discovery and the parties shall not be obligated to preserve 

such information in any form or include such information on any privilege log:

a. The content of communications among and between:

i. counsel and the expert and/or the expert’s staff and/or supporting 

firms;

ii. counsel and any non-testifying expert consultant and/or the 

consultant’s staff;

iii. the expert and other experts and/or other non-testifying expert 

consultants;

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 2 of 7
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

iv. experts and their staff and/or supporting firms;

v. non-testifying expert consultants and their staffs;

vi. the respective staffs and/or supporting firms of experts or nontestifying expert consultants and the staffs and/or supporting firms of 

other experts or non-testifying expert consultants.

b. Notes, drafts, written communications, preliminary or intermediate 

calculations, computations or other data runs, or other types of preliminary work created by, for, or 

at the direction of a testifying expert.

5. No party or their experts are obligated to preserve or produce budgets, invoices, bills, 

receipts or time records concerning testifying or non-testifying expert witnesses or consultants, their 

staff, assistants, colleagues, or associates, or their companies or organizations.

6. The limitations contained in paragraphs 4 and 5 above shall not apply to any 

communications, documents, data sets, data runs, calculations, computations or other forms of 

information or work upon which a testifying expert relies as a basis for any of his or her opinions or 

reports.

7. Notwithstanding the limitations contained in paragraphs 4 and 5 above, an expert may 

be asked: (a) to identify and generally describe investigations or modeling (including any regression 

analyses) that the expert attempted but rejected, (b) to describe the reasons for rejecting any such 

investigations or modeling, (c) to respond to reasonable questions regarding the hourly rates of the 

expert and his or her staff, the amount of time an expert or that expert’s staff has spent on the 

expert’s report and associated work, and the amount of money billed for the report and associated 

work.

8. Within three business days of any party serving any expert report and/or expert 

declaration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) or otherwise, the party or parties proffering the 

expert witness shall produce: the data or other information relied upon by the expert witness in 

forming the expert witness’s opinions; any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support the 

expert witness’s opinions; any work product (including but not limited to, analyses, spreadsheets, 

graphs, and charts) relied upon by the expert witness that is based on the output from any computer 

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 3 of 7
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

programs that are produced; the expert witness’s qualifications, including a list of all publications 

authored in the previous 10 years; a list of all other cases in which, during the previous four years, 

the expert witness has testified as an expert at trial or by deposition; and a statement of the hourly 

rate to be paid for the expert witness’s time in the case. “Data or other information relied upon” 

shall be deemed to include, but will not be limited to, underlying data, spreadsheets, computerized 

regression analysis and/or other underlying reports and schedules sufficient to reconstruct the work, 

calculations, and/or analyses upon which the expert witness is relying for his or her opinions.

9. The information required by paragraph 8 above to be produced shall be produced 

electronically (via email, disc or FTP site) where feasible. Data, statistical analyses, or other 

information (including any calculation or exhibit) upon which an expert relies for any of his or her 

opinion(s) in this matter shall be provided in machine readable format, including any data that has 

been cleaned, reformatted, or modified in any way from the form in which it may have been 

provided to the expert. All other documents, data, and other information relied upon shall be 

provided in a format as agreed to by the parties, along with any software and instructions required to 

read them, but no party need produce computer software that is reasonably and commercially 

available (e.g., Microsoft Word, Excel). Documents that are publicly available need not be produced 

absent specific request if they are identified with sufficient specificity to allow the opposing side to 

locate and obtain the document. Documents that have previously been produced during discovery 

need not be produced if they are identified by Bates number. 

10. Paragraph 8 above is not intended to limit the ability of any party to prepare and use 

demonstrative exhibits, including demonstrative exhibits that may relate to an expert’s testimony, 

during the course of any hearing or trial. The admissibility of any such demonstrative exhibits shall 

be subject to the Federal Rules of Evidence, the Rules of Civil Procedure, and this Court’s Local 

Rules, unless otherwise provided by order of the Court.

11. No subpoenas (for depositions or documents) need be served on any testifying expert 

from whom a report or declaration is provided. Instead, the party proffering such expert will (a) be 

responsible for producing all materials and information relied on by the expert, and (b) make the 

expert available for deposition at a time mutually agreed to by the parties and consistent with the 

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 4 of 7
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

Court’s scheduling orders. Nothing in this Stipulation shall permit a party or a testifying expert to 

withhold any proposition, fact, belief or other data, information or material on which the expert 

relies in support of her or his opinion(s) in this matter.

12. The parties agree to comply with this Stipulation pending the Court’s approval.

DATED: September 19, 2016

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

By /s/ Jeff D. Friedman 

 JEFF D. FRIEDMAN

Shana E. Scarlett (217895)

Benjamin Siegel (256260)

715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 

Berkeley, CA 94710

Telephone: (510) 725-3000

Facsimile: (510) 725-3001

jefff@hbsslaw.com

shanas@hbsslaw.com

bens@hbsslaw.com

Steve W. Berman (pro hac vice)

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300

Seattle, WA 98101

Telephone: (206) 623-7292

Facsimile: (206) 623-0594

steve@hbsslaw.com

Co-Lead Counsel for Direct Purchaser 

Plaintiffs

COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL 

PLLC

By /s/ Kit A. Pierson 

 KIT A. PIERSON

Daniel A. Small (pro hac vice)

Emmy L. Levens (pro hac vice)

Robert H. Braun (pro hac vice)

Laura Alexander (255485)

1100 New York Ave. NW, Suite 500, West 

Tower

Washington, DC 20005

Telephone: (202) 408-4600

kpierson@cohenmilstein.com

dsmall@cohenmilstein.com

elevens@cohenmilstein.com

rbraun@cohenmilstein.com

lalexander@cohenmilstein.com

Co-Lead Counsel for Direct Purchaser 

Plaintiffs

CROWELL & MORING LLP 

By /s/ Jason C. Murray 

 JASON C. MURRAY 

Emily Tomoko Kuwahara 

Robert B. McNary

Jordan Lee Ludwig 

515 South Flower Street , 40th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90071 

Telephone: (213) 622-4750 

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 

By /s/ Jeffrey L. Kessler 

 JEFFREY L. KESSLER

Jeffrey L. Kessler 

Eva W. Cole

Erica C. Smilevski

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

200 Park Avenue 

New York, NY 10166 

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 5 of 7
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

5

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

Facsimile: (213) 622-2690 

jmurray@crowell.com 

ekuwahara@crowell.com

rmcnary@crowell.com

jludwig@crowell.com

Katie Michelle Yablonka 

CROWELL & MORING LLP 

275 Battery St., 23rd Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 365-7250 

kyablonka@crowell.com 

Counsel for KOA Corp. and KOA Speer 

Electronics, Inc. 

Telephone: (212) 294-4698 

Facsimile: (212) 294-4700 

jkessler@winston.com 

ewcole@winston.com

esmilevski@winston.com

Ian L. Papendick 

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

101 California Street 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 591-6905 

Facsimile: (415) 591-1400 

ipapendick@winston.com 

Brandon W Duke 

WINSTON & STRAWN LLP

1111 Louisiana Street 

25th Floor 

Houston, TX 77002 

Telephone: (713) 651-2636 

bduke@winston.com 

Counsel for Panasonic Corp. and

Panasonic Corp. of North America 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

By /s/ Michael F. Tubach 

 MICHAEL F.TUBACH

Two Embarcadero Center , 28th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111-3305 

Telephone: (415) 984-8700 

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 

mtubach@omm.com 

Kenneth Ryan O’Rourke 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

400 South Hope Street 

Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 

Telephone: (213) 430-6000 

Facsimile: (213) 430-6407 

korourke@omm.com 

Counsel for Rohm Co. Ltd. and Rohm 

Semiconductor U.S.A., LLC

COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY LLP

By /s/ Steven N. Williams 

 STEVEN N. WILLIAMS

Joseph W. Cotchett

Adam John Zapala 

Demetrius Xavier Lambrinos

Joyce Chang

Elizabeth Tran

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Telephone: (650) 697-6000 

Facsimile: (650) 697-6340 

jcotchett@cpmlegal.com

swilliams@cpmlegal.com

azapala@cpmlegal.com 

dlambrinos@cpmlegal.com 

jchang@cpmlegal.com 

etran@cpmlegal.com 

Counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 6 of 7
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

6

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONCERNING EXPERT DISCOVERY

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-03820

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

By /s/ Kendall Millard 

 KENDALL MILLARD

Todd A. Dixon

Bradley R. Love

11 South Meridian Street

Indianapolis, IN 46204-3535

Telephone: (317) 236-1313

Facsimile: (317) 231-7433

kendall.millard@btlaw.com

tdixon@btlaw.com

blove@btlaw.com

Roya Rahmanpour

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

2029 Century Park East, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Telephone: (310) 284-3892

Facsimile: (310) 284-3894

roya.rahmanpour@btlaw.com

Counsel for Hokuriku Electric Industry Co.

and HDK America, Inc.

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

By /s/ Ashley M. Bauer 

 ASHLEY M. BAUER

Belinda S Lee

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111-6538

Telephone: (415) 395-8138

belinda.lee@lw.com

ashley.bauer@lw.com

Counsel for Kamaya, Inc. and Kamaya 

Electric Co., Ltd.

E-FILING ATTESTATION

I, Jeff D. Friedman, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 

document. In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that each of the signatories 

identified above has concurred in this filing.

/s/ Jeff D. Friedman

JEFF D. FRIEDMAN

 * * *

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________________________

HONORABLE JAMES DONATO

United States District Court Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

APPROVED

September 19, 2016

Judge James Donato

Case 3:15-cv-03820-JD Document 215 Filed 09/19/16 Page 7 of 7