Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-md-01819/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-md-01819-18/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER -- Mstr Dkt. No. M:07-cv-01819-CW 1

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 

Joseph W. Cotchett (SB No.36324) 

jcotchett@cpmlegal.com

Steven N. Williams (SB No. 175489) 

swilliams@cpmlegal.com

Nancy L. Fineman (SB No. 124870) 

nfineman@cpmlegal.com

Neil Swartzberg (SB No. 215133) 

nswartzberg@cpmlegal.com

Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy 

San Francisco Airport Office Center 

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 

Burlingame, CA 94010 

Telephone: (650) 697-6000 

Facsimile: (650) 697-0577 

Interim Lead Counsel and Liaison Counsel 

for the Direct-Purchaser Plaintiffs and the 

Proposed Class 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

(OAKLAND DIVISION) 

IN RE STATIC RANDOM ACCESS ) Case No. M:07-CV-01819-CW 

MEMORY (SRAM) ANTITRUST ) 

LITIGATION ) MDL No. 1819 

____________________________________) 

 ) STIPULATION 

This Document Relates To: ) ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO 

) FILE MOTION FOR CLASS 

ALL DIRECT ) CERTIFICATION 

PURCHASER ACTIONS ) [CIVIL LOCAL RULE 6-2] 

____________________________________) 

WHEREAS, on June 1, 2007, a Case Management Conference was held before the 

Court in the coordinated proceedings In re Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust 

Litigation, Case No. M:07-cv-1819-CW; 

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 379 Filed 03/10/08 Page 1 of 6
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER -- Mstr Dkt. No. M:07-cv-01819-CW 2

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 

WHEREAS, the Court’s CMC order dated June 8, 2007, requires the Direct Purchaser 

Plaintiffs to file their Motion for Class Certification and expert reports in support thereof on 

February 15, 2008 with Defendants’ Opposition to be filed on April 17, 2008, and the Direct 

Purchaser Plaintiffs’ Reply to be filed on May 1, 2008; 

WHEREAS, Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs filed their Consolidated Class Action 

Complaint (“CCAC”) on August 31, 2007; 

 

WHEREAS, Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss the CCAC on October 22, 2007; 

 

WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Court regarding those Motions to Dismiss on 

December 20, 2007; 

 

WHEREAS, the Minute Order from the December 20, 2007 stated that “After Court 

issues order on motions [to dismiss], counsel to meet and confer re adjusting CMC dates for 

class certification.” 

 

WHEREAS, as of the date this stipulation, the Court has yet to issue orders regarding 

the Motions to Dismiss the CCAC; 

 

WHEREAS, the Parties identified below agree to an extension as follows: 

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 379 Filed 03/10/08 Page 2 of 6
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER -- Mstr Dkt. No. M:07-cv-01819-CW 3

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 

Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs shall file their Motion for Class Certification and expert 

reports in support thereof 90 days after the pleadings are settled between the Direct 

Purchaser Plaintiffs and the Defendants1, meaning the latter of: 

(i) the date this Court issues its order on the pending Motions to Dismiss the Direct 

Purchasers’ CCAC; or, 

(ii) in the event the pending Motions to Dismiss (or any subsequent Motion to 

Dismiss filed by any Defendant) are granted with leave to amend, and the Direct 

Purchaser Plaintiffs file an amended complaint, and any Defendant also files a 

subsequent Motion to Dismiss, the date this Court issues its order on the last of 

such subsequent motions. 

 NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, it is hereby stipulated by the 

undersigned counsel on behalf of the Parties identified below, and subject to the Court’s 

approval, that the deadline for the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs’ to file a Motion for Class 

Certification, expert reports in support thereof, as well as oppositions and replies to such a 

Motion, are amended as follows: 

1. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs shall file their Motion for Class Certification and expert 

reports in support thereof ninety (90) days after the pleadings are settled between 

the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs and the Defendants. 

2. Defendants’ Oppositions to the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class 

Certification will be due sixty (60) days after filing of the Direct Purchaser 

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. 

3. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs’ Reply will be due twenty-one (21) days after filing of 

the Defendants’ Oppositions to the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs’ Motion for 

Class Certification. 

 

1

 Defendants, as the term is used here, includes only those domestic Defendants who had been 

served with the CCAC and/or filed or joined any of the pending Motions to Dismiss. The term 

does not include foreign Defendants, so any challenge any foreign Defendant may raise to any 

Direct Purchaser Plaintiff complaint does not, by this stipulation, effect the date for filing the 

Motion for Class Certification. 

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 379 Filed 03/10/08 Page 3 of 6
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER -- Mstr Dkt. No. M:07-cv-01819-CW 4

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 

Dated: February 12, 2008 COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY 

 By: ___________/s/__________________ 

 Steven N. Williams 

 

 Lead Counsel and Liaison Counsel for the 

 Direct-Purchaser Plaintiffs and the 

 Proposed Class 

 

THELEN REID BROWN RAYSMAN & 

STEINER LLP 

 

 

 By: ____________/s/_________________ 

 Paul R. Griffin 

 

 Liaison Counsel for Defendants 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 10, 2008 ________________________________ 

 Hon. Claudia Wilken 

 United States District Judge 

 Northern District of California 

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 379 Filed 03/10/08 Page 4 of 6
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER -- Mstr Dkt. No. M:07-cv-01819-CW 5

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 

ATTESTATION OF FILING 

 Pursuant to N.D. Cal. General Order No. 45, section 45 X(B), I, Steven N. Williams, 

hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this stipulation and proposed order has been 

obtained from Liaison Counsel for Defendants who has provided the conformed signature 

above. 

 COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY 

 By: ___________/s/__________________ 

 Steven N. Williams 

 

 Lead Counsel and Liaison Counsel for the 

 Direct-Purchaser Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 379 Filed 03/10/08 Page 5 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 

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 379 Filed 03/10/08 Page 6 of 6