Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-04333/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-04333-46/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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER; 

CASE NO. C 06-4333 PJH; MDL NO. 1486 

KENNETH R. O’ROURKE (S.B. #120144)

korourke@omm.com 

STEVEN H. BERGMAN (S.B. #180542)

sbergman@omm.com 

JANE Y. CHANG (S.B. #241890)

jchang@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

400 South Hope Street 

Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 

Telephone: (213) 430-6000 

Facsimile: (213) 430-6407 

MICHAEL F. TUBACH (S.B. #145955)

mtubach@omm.com 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

275 Battery St. 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 984-8700 

Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 

Attorneys for Defendants 

HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC. and 

HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG et 

al., 

Defendants. 

Master File No. M-02-1486 PJH 

MDL. No. 1486 

Case No. C 06-4333 PJH 

Assigned for all purposes to the 

Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING 

DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE DATE TO 

PLAINTIFFS’ THIRD AMENDED 

COMPLAINT 

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 393 Filed 05/02/08 Page 1 of 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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER; 

CASE NO. C 06-4333 PJH; MDL NO. 1486 

Plaintiffs and Defendants Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (USA) 

Inc. (collectively “Elpida”), Infineon Technologies AG and Infineon Technologies North 

America Corp. (collectively “Infineon”), Hynix Semiconductor Inc. and Hynix 

Semiconductor America Inc. (collectively “Hynix”), Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron 

Semiconductor Products, Inc. (collectively “Micron”), Mosel Vitelic Inc. and Mosel 

Vitelic Corp. (collectively “Mosel”), Nanya Technology Corp. and Nanya Technology 

Corp. USA (collectively "Nanya"), and NEC Electronics America, Inc., by and through 

their counsel, jointly submit this stipulation regarding Defendants’ response, whether by 

answer or motion, to Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint filed with the Court on 

November 7, 2007. 

WHEREAS, the Court issued an order on April 15, 2008 granting in part 

and denying in part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss; and 

WHEREAS, the Defendants’ response, whether by answer or motion, to 

Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint is currently due on April 29, 2008. 

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, by and 

between their counsel and subject to Court approval, that without waiving the right to 

assert any and all defenses available to Defendants, Defendants will respond to the Third 

Amended Complaint, whether by answer or motion, by May 13, 2008. 

// 

// 

// 

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 393 Filed 05/02/08 Page 2 of 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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER; 

CASE NO. C 06-4333 PJH; MDL NO. 1486 

Dated: April 25, 2008 

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR. 

Attorney General of the State of California 

THOMAS GREENE 

KATHLEEN E. FOOTE 

EMILIO E. VARANINI 

By: /s/ Emilio E. Varanini .

 Emilio E. Varanini 

Liaison Counsel for Plaintiff States 

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP 

KENNETH R. O’ROURKE. 

MICHAEL F. TUBACH 

STEVEN H. BERGMAN 

JANE Y. CHANG 

By: /s/ Steven H. Bergman

 Steven H. Bergman 

Attorneys for Hynix Semiconductor Inc. 

and Hynix Semiconductor America Inc. 

and, for purposes of this stipulation only, 

signing with permission of all other 

defendants

ATTESTATION OF FILING

Pursuant to General Order No. 45 § X(B), I hereby attest that I have obtained 

concurrence in the filing of this Joint Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding 

Defendants’ Response Date to Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint from all of the 

parties listed in the signature blocks above. 

By: /s/ Steven H. Bergman

 Steven H. Bergman 

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 393 Filed 05/02/08 Page 3 of 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 

JOINT STIPULATION AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER; 

CASE NO. C 06-4333 PJH; MDL NO. 1486 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the Stipulation of the parties, the Court hereby orders that Defendants 

shall respond to the Third Amended Complaint in State of California v. Infineon 

Technologies AG, Case No. C-06-4333 PJH, by answer or by motion, by May 13, 2008. 

Dated: April ____, 2008 

 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 

United States District Court Judge 

LA2:859480.1 

MAY 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:06-cv-04333-PJH Document 393 Filed 05/02/08 Page 4 of 4