Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05700/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-05700-14/pdf.json

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

---

STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY [AND] PROPOSED ORDER

MDL DOCKET NO. C 04-1648 MJJ; INDIVIDUAL CASE NO. C 06-5700 MJJ 

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 

R. Scott Feldmann (CA Bar No. 169230) 

Daniel A. Sasse (CA Bar No. 236234) 

Van-Dzung V. Nguyen (CA Bar No. 222832) 

CROWELL & MORING LLP 

3 Park Plaza, 20th Floor 

Irvine, CA 92614 

Telephone: (949) 263-8400 

Facsimile: (949) 263-8414 

Email: sfeldmann@crowell.com 

dsasse@crowell.com 

vnguyen@crowell.com 

Kent A. Gardiner 

Alexandre de Gramont 

CROWELL & MORING LLP 

1001 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Telephone: (202) 624-2500 

Facsimile: (202) 628-5116 

Email: kgardiner@crowell.com 

adegramont@crowell.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Bandag, Incorporated 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

IN RE RUBBER CHEMICALS ANTITRUST 

LITIGATION 

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: 

Bridgestone Americas Holding, Inc., et al. 

 v. Chemtura Corporation, et al. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Docket No. C 04-1648 MJJ 

Individual Case No. C 06-5700 MJJ

STIPULATION REGARDING 

EXPERT DISCOVERY [AND] 

PROPOSED ORDER 

Case 3:06-cv-05700-MMC Document 136 Filed 07/19/07 Page 1 of 5
2

STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

MDL DOCKET NO. C 04-1648 MJJ; INDIVIDUAL CASE NO. C 06-5700 MJJ 

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 

Plaintiff and Defendants (collectively, the “Parties”) in Bridgestone Americas Holding, 

Inc., et al. v. Chemtura Corporation, et al., Individual Case No. C 06-5700 MJJ (the “Action”), 

by and through their respective counsel, with regard to respective experts retained by them (both 

testifying and non-testifying), seek to limit document discovery and HEREBY AGREE AND 

STIPULATE THAT: 

1. Subject to the exception below, notwithstanding any provision of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure or local rules, no Party shall seek from any other Party document 

discovery (both electronic and written) of: (a) communications or correspondence between any 

Party’s attorney(s) and expert(s) (both testifying and non-testifying), (b) experts’ notes, or (c) 

draft(s) of any expert’s report(s). The exception to this agreement is that, in the event that an 

expert is relying on a fact or document provided to him or her by counsel in expressing his or her 

opinions or in giving testimony, the fact or document upon which the expert is relying shall be 

discoverable. 

 2. Nothing herein shall otherwise modify or eliminate any requirements with respect 

to experts contained in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 or any other applicable local rule. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: June __, 2007 CROWELL & MORING LLP 

R. Scott Feldmann 

Daniel A. Sasse 

Van-Dzung V. Nguyen 

3 Park Plaza, 20th Floor 

Irvine, CA 92614-8505 

Telephone: (949) 263-8400 

Facsimile: (949) 263-8414 

Kent A. Gardiner 

Alexandre de Gramont 

1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

Telephone: (202) 624-2500 

Facsimile: (202) 628-5116 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Bandag, Incorporated 

Case 3:06-cv-05700-MMC Document 136 Filed 07/19/07 Page 2 of 5
3

STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

MDL DOCKET NO. C 04-1648 MJJ; INDIVIDUAL CASE NO. C 06-5700 MJJ 

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 

ADDITIONAL SIGNATURE PAGE TO STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT 

DISCOVERY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Dated: June __, 2007 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

Ian T. Simmons 

Matthew R. Cosgrove* 

Benjamin G. Bradshaw 

Nilam A. Sanghvi* 

Angela Thaler Wilks 

1625 Eye Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20006-4001 

Telephone: (202) 383-5300 

Facsimile: (202) 383-5414 

Attorneys for Defendants Chemtura Corporation 

(formerly known as Crompton Corporation) and 

Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc. 

*Admitted in New York Only 

Dated: June __, 2007 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP

Mark Hellerer 

Ranah Leila Esmaili 

1540 Broadway 

New York, NY 10036-4039 

Telephone: (212) 858-1000 

Facsimile: (212) 858-1500 

Attorney for Defendant James J. Conway 

[SIGNATURES CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

Case 3:06-cv-05700-MMC Document 136 Filed 07/19/07 Page 3 of 5
4

STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

MDL DOCKET NO. C 04-1648 MJJ; INDIVIDUAL CASE NO. C 06-5700 MJJ 

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 

ADDITIONAL SIGNATURE PAGE TO STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT 

DISCOVERY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Dated: June __, 2007 ROPES & GRAY LLP

Jason Brown 

Rachel J. Nash 

45 Rockefeller Plaza 

New York, NY 10111 

Telephone: (212) 841-5700 

Facsimile: (212) 841-5725 

Attorneys for Defendant Michael J. Duchesne 

Dated: June __, 2007 COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP

William J. Schwartz 

Jason M. Koral

1114 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, NY 10036-7798 

Telephone: (212) 856-9600 

Facsimile: (212) 856-9494 

Attorneys for Defendant Joseph B. Eisenberg 

Dated: June ___, 2007 MORVILLO, ABRAMOWITZ, GRAND, IASON, 

ANELLO & BOHRER, P.C.

Barry A. Bohrer 

E. Scott Schirick 

565 Fifth Avenue 

New York, NY 10017 

Telephone: (212) 856-9600 

Facsimile: (212) 856-9494 

Attorneys for Defendant Peter D. Welch 

Case 3:06-cv-05700-MMC Document 136 Filed 07/19/07 Page 4 of 5
5

STIPULATION REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

MDL DOCKET NO. C 04-1648 MJJ; INDIVIDUAL CASE NO. C 06-5700 MJJ 

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 

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, THAT: 

1. Subject to the exception below, notwithstanding any provision of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure or local rules, no Party shall seek from any other Party document 

discovery (both electronic and written) of: (a) communications or correspondence between any 

Party’s attorney(s) and expert(s) (both testifying and non-testifying), (b) experts’ notes, or (c) 

draft(s) of any expert’s report(s). The exception to this agreement is that, in the event that an 

expert is relying on a fact or document provided to him or her by counsel in expressing his or her 

opinions or in giving testimony, the fact or document upon which the expert is relying shall be 

discoverable. 

2. Nothing herein shall otherwise modify or eliminate any requirements with respect 

to experts contained in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 or any other applicable local rule. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _______________________, 2007 BY:_______________________________ 

 HONORABLE MARTIN J. JENKINS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF 

CALIFORNIA 

7/13

Case 3:06-cv-05700-MMC Document 136 Filed 07/19/07 Page 5 of 5