Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-md-01761/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-md-01761-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Anti-trust

---

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 FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

[Counsel listed on signature page.]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

IN RE DITROPAN XL ANTITRUST 

LITIGATION 

MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

This Document Relates to: 

ALL ACTIONS 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER FOR SECOND 

AMENDMENT TO CASE 

MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 2 TO 

EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE 

 Hon. Jeffrey S. White 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1. On October 27, 2006, the Court held an initial case management conference 

pursuant to Local Rule 16-10(a) and Federal Rule 16. As a result of that conference, the Court 

entered Stipulated Case Management Order (“CMO”) No. 2 on November 1, 2006. 

2. On June 26, 2007, the Direct and Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs each filed motions 

for class certification, with supporting expert declarations. Approximately one month later, on 

July 27, 2007, Direct Purchaser Plaintiff provided the supporting data for its expert's declaration. 

Defendants' opposition briefs to the Plaintiffs' class certification motions are currently due on 

September 25, 2007. 

3. Discovery has been proceeding on all issues. In response to document requests 

served by the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs in December of 2006 and by the Direct Purchaser 

Plaintiffs in February of 2007, Alza has produced over 530,000 pages of documents. Alza began 

rolling its production of documents in March of 2007 and completed its production this month. 

Other J&J entities, in response to third-party subpoenas, have produced an additional 250,000 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 1 of 7 Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 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 

 -2- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

pages of documents. The parties have begun to set Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, the first of which 

are going to take place in late September. 

4. Defendants served document requests on the Direct and Indirect Purchasers in 

January of 2007. In response, Indirect Purchasers began producing documents in late July of 

2007. Direct Purchasers have, to date, not yet produced any documents. Moreover, a dispute 

has arisen between Defendants and Direct Purchasers because Direct Purchasers have refused to 

give Defendants certain documents to which Defendants believe they are entitled. Direct 

Purchasers and Defendants will be filing motions with Magistrate Judge Laporte to resolve their 

dispute. 

5. The schedule originally contemplated by the parties assumed that the Defendants 

would have several months to analyze the documents, data, and expert reports provided by 

Plaintiffs relating to class certification issues, as well as take depositions of the Plaintiffs, in 

advance of the deadline for class certification oppositions. Given the realities of the Plaintiffs' 

documents productions and disclosure of expert data, Defendant’s document production, the 

timing of the initial Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, and the pending dispute regarding the scope of the 

Direct Purchaser Plaintiff's discovery obligations, the current schedule does not allow 

Defendants the time contemplated to prepare their briefs and expert reports in opposition to the 

pending class certification motions nor does it allow Plaintiffs the time contemplated for 

completion of depositions.. For that reason, the parties seek an extension of the case schedule. 

6. The parties have agreed and hereby stipulate (subject to the Court’s order 

allowing them to do so) that Defendants be granted a 60-day extension of time, until November 

27, 2007, to file their oppositions to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. In addition, the 

parties have agreed that the remaining dates and deadlines established by CMO No. 2 shall 

likewise be extended by approximately 60 days (with the exception of the deadline for written 

discovery relating to the issues set forth in Paragraph 3(b)-(d) of Case Management Order #2, as 

discussed in Paragraph 8 below). Specifically, the parties stipulate to the following amendments 

to CMO No. 2: 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 2 of 7 Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 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 

 -3- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

CMO No. 2 Amendment #1 Amendment #2

Motion For Class 

Certification and 

Expert Reports in 

Support of Class 

Certification 

Deadline for 

Defendants to 

depose Plaintiffs' 

experts, respond 

to motion, and 

file their expert 

reports: 

Deadline for 

Plaintiffs to 

depose 

Defendants' 

experts and file 

reply: 

Hearing: 

July 27, 2007 

Aug. 24, 2007 

Sept. 14, 2007 

Sept. 25, 2007 

Oct. 23, 2007 

Nov. 16, 2007 

Nov. 27, 2007 

Dec. 21, 2007 

TBD by Court 

Motion For 

Summary 

Judgment or 

Partial Summary 

Judgment 

Regarding Issues 

in Paragraphs 3(b) 

through 3(d) of 

CMO No. 2 and 

Expert Reports in 

Support of 

Summary 

Judgment 

Opening Motion 

and supporting 

expert reports: 

Cross Motion 

and Opposition 

Motion and 

supporting 

expert reports: 

Opposition to 

Cross Motion 

(and supporting 

expert reports) 

and Reply in 

Support of 

Opening Motion: 

Reply in Support 

of Cross Motion: 

Hearing (If No 

Cross Motions 

Filed): 

Hearing (If Cross 

Motions Filed): 

Oct. 12, 2007 

Nov. 21, 

2007 

Dec. 21, 

2007 

Jan. 25, 2008 

Jan. 11, 2008 

Feb. 15, 2008 

Dec. 11, 2007 

Jan. 18, 2008 

Feb. 15, 2008 

Mar. 21, 2008 

Mar. 21, 2008 

April 11, 2008 

Feb. 8, 2008 

Mar. 20, 2008 

April 16, 2008 

May 21, 2008 

TBD by Court 

TBD by Court 

Completion of 

Discovery 

Relating to 

Direct Purchaser 

will complete its 

document 

N/A N/A Aug. 31, 2007 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 3 of 7

Jan. 11., 2008 May 9, 2008 June 13, 2008

Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 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 

 -4- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

CMO No. 2 Amendment #1 Amendment #2

Specific Issues in 

CMO No. 2 

production 

Paragraph 3(a): 

Paragraphs 3(b)-

(d) – Written 

Discovery 

Paragraphs 3(b)-

(d) – Depositions 

July 13, 2007 

Sept. 28, 

2007 

Sept. 28, 

2007 

Sept. 11, 2007 

Nov. 16, 2007 

Nov. 16, 2007 

Nov. 9, 2007 

Nov. 16, 2007 

Jan. 25, 2007 

7. Defendants specifically note that they may be forced to move for an additional 

extension of time with respect to their opposition to the Direct Purchaser Plaintiff's motion for 

class certification if the Direct Purchaser Plaintiff does not produce its documents by August 31, 

2007, and depending upon the timing of the resolution of the outstanding discovery disputes 

between Defendants and Direct Purchaser Plaintiff and the consequent production of any 

disputed materials (if the Court orders the production of such materials). Defendants and Direct 

Purchaser Plaintiff have stipulated to an expedited schedule for briefing the discovery disputes to 

Magistrate Judge Laporte. 

8. As the schedule above indicates, the deadline for written discovery on the specific 

issues listed in Paragraphs 3(b)-(d) of Case Management Order #2 is not being extended. The 

parties specifically understand that, consistent with Local Rule 26-2, all written discovery 

(including requests for production of documents, interrogatories, and requests for admission, as 

well as third-party document subpoenas) relating to the issues set forth in Paragraphs 3(b)-(d) 

must be served in sufficient time that responses will fall due on or before November 16, 2007. 

The parties further understand that, also consistent with Local Rule 26-2, any motions to compel 

based upon written discovery responses relating to the issues set forth in Paragraphs 3(b)-(d) 

must be brought within seven court days of November 16, 2007. Parties may take additional 

discovery pertaining to the issues set forth in Paragraphs 3(b)-(d) of CMO #2 only upon a 

showing of good cause – for example, if a party learns of an issue for the first time through 

depositions occurring after November 16, 2007, and the issue was not reasonably foreseeable 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 4 of 7 Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 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 

 -5- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

prior to that time. Nothing in this agreement, however, shall modify any party's ordinary duty to 

supplement its discovery responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e). 

9. Nothing in this Stipulation alters or modifies any provision in CMO No. 2 except 

as specifically set forth in this Stipulation. 

10. This stipulation for an extension of time has been brought in good faith and not 

for purposes of undue delay or harassment, and conforms with the requirements of Local Rules 

6-2, 7-12, and 16-2(d), and with Federal Rule 16(b), which requires “a showing of good cause” 

for the modification of a scheduling order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b). 

11. Pursuant to Local Rule 16-2(d), counsel for Direct Purchaser Plaintiff (Debra 

Gaw and Ed Notargiacomo), counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (Jason Thompson), and 

counsel for Defendants (M. Sean Royall) consulted about the positions set forth in this 

Stipulation and Proposed Order. All parties have agreed to this Stipulation. 

 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their designated 

counsel that the Defendants shall have until November 27, 2007 to file their opposition to the 

Plaintiffs' motions for class certification in this matter and that all deadlines contained in the 

Stipulated Case Management Order No. 2 (except the deadline for the completion of written 

discovery relating to the issues set forth in Paragraph 3(b)-(d) of that Order) be extended by the 

approximately 60 days, as specified in Paragraph 6 above. 

STIPULATED AND AGREED TO BY:

DATED: August 27, 2007 

 /s/ Jason J. Thompson 

Edward A. Wallace 

WEXLER WALLACE TORISEVA LLP 

One North LaSalle Street, Suite 2000 

Chicago, IL 60602 

Telephone: (312) 346-2222 

Facsimile: (312) 346-0022 

Timothy J. Becker 

ZIMMERMAN REED, P.L.L.P. 

651 Nicollet Mall, Suite 501 

Minneapolis, MN 55402 

Telephone: (612) 341-0400 

Facsimile: (612) 341-0844 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 5 of 7 Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 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 

 -6- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

Jason J. Thompson 

J. THOMPSON & ASSOCIATES PLC 

26000 West Twelve Mile Road 

Southfield, MI 48034 

Telephone: (248) 436-8448 

Facsimile: (248) 436-8453 

Jeffrey L. Kodroff 

SPECTOR, ROSEMAN & KODROFF, P.C. 

1818 Market Street, Suite 2500 

Philadelphia, PA 19103 

Telephone: (215) 496-0300 

Facsimile: (215) 496-6611

Attorneys for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs 

DATED: August 27, 2007 

 /s/ Edward Notargiacomo 

Thomas M. Sobol 

Edward Notargiacomo 

Debra Gaw 

Gregory Matthews 

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO, LLP 

One Main Street, 4th Floor 

Cambridge, MA 02142 

Telephone: (617) 482-3700 

Facsimile: (617) 482-3003 

Dianne M. Nast 

RODANAST, PC 

801 Estelle Drive 

Lancaster, PA 17601 

Telephone: (717) 892-3000 

Facsimile: (717) 892-1200 

Attorneys for Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 6 of 7 Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 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 

 -7- 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR SECOND AMENDMENT TO CASE MANAGEMENT 

ORDER NO. 2 TO EXTEND CASE SCHEDULE MDL No. 1761 (JSW) 

DATED: August 27, 2007 

 /s/ Michael A. Sitzman 

M. Sean Royall (admitted pro hac vice) 

Monique Michal Drake, SBN 167188 

Michael A. Sitzman, SBN 156667 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

One Montgomery Street, Suite 3100 

San Francisco, California 94104 

Telephone: (415) 393-8200 

Facsimile: (415) 986-5309 

Email: sroyall@gibsondunn.com

Email: mdrake@gibsondunn.com

Email: msitzman@gibsondunn.com

Attorneys for Defendants Alza Corporation and 

Johnson & Johnson 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August __, 2007 

The Honorable Jeffrey S. White 

United States District Judge 

Case M:06-cv-01761-JSW Document 102 Filed 08/27/2007 Page 7 of 7

28

Case 3:06-md-01761-JSW Document 103 Filed 08/28/07 Page 7 of 7