Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05944/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05944-476/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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT)

ANTITRUST LITIGATION

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL No. 1917

Case No. 07-cv-5944 JST

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN 

CLAIMS AGAINST IRICO 

ENTITIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE

This Order Relates To:

All Direct Action Plaintiffs

Pursuant to the Court’s June 28, 2016 order regarding defendants Irico Display Devices Co., 

Ltd. and Irico Group Corporation (the “Irico Entities”), ECF No. 4694, and Direct Action Plaintiffs’ 

response to that order, ECF No. 4702, the claims against the Irico Entities contained in the following 

complaints are now dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure: 

 The claims of Tech Data Corp. and Tech Data Product Management, Inc. in the First Amended 

Complaint filed on September 9, 2013, ECF No. 1911;

 The claims of Interbond Corporation of America in the First Amended Complaint filed October 

3, 2013, ECF No. 1974; 

 The claims of CompuCom Systems, Inc. in the First Amended Complaint filed October 3, 2013, 

ECF No. 1975; 

 The claims of Electrograph Systems, Inc. and Electrograph Technologies Corp. in the First 

Amended Complaint filed October 3, 2013, ECF No. 1976; 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 4710 Filed 07/06/16 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

 The claims of Office Depot, Inc. in the First Amended Complaint filed October 3, 2013, ECF 

No. 1977; 

 The claims of P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corporation, MARTA Cooperative of America, 

Inc., and ABC Appliance, Inc. in the First Amended Complaint filed October 3, 2013, ECF No. 

1979;

 The claims of Schultze Agency Services, LLC on behalf of Tweeter Opco, LLC and Tweeter 

Newco, LLC in the First Amended Complaint filed October 3, 2013, ECF No. 1980;

 The claims of Costco Wholesale Corp. in the First Amended Complaint filed on October 3, 

2013, ECF No. 1982; 

 The claims of Dell Inc. and Dell Products L.P. in the Amended Complaint filed on June 10, 

2013, ECF. No. 1726; and

 The claims of Sears, Roebuck and Co., and Kmart Corporation in the Second Amended 

Complaint filed on October 3, 2013, ECF No. 1973.

Pursuant to the stipulation of plaintiff Target Corporation in Target Corp. v. Chunghwa Picture 

Tubes, Ltd., Case Number 11-cv-5514, Target’s claims against the Irico Entities contained in the 

complaint in that action, ECF No. 1 on that docket, are dismissed with prejudice. See ECF No. 4703. 

Pursuant to the stipulation of plaintiff ViewSonic Corporation in Target Corp. v. Chunghwa 

Picture Tubes, Ltd., Case Number 14-cv-2510, Target’s claims against the Irico Entities contained in the 

complaint in that action, ECF No. 1 on that docket, are dismissed with prejudice. See ECF No. 4704. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2016

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 4710 Filed 07/06/16 Page 2 of 2