Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05944/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05944-284/pdf.json

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

---

ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

60835670.1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING 

THE DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL PHILIPS 

TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS 

FOR ADMISSION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

IN RE: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT)

ANTITRUST LITIGATION 

This Document Relates to 

Electrograph Systems, Inc. et al. v. Hitachi, Ltd., 

et al., No. 11-cv-01656; 

Siegel v. Hitachi, Ltd., et al., No. 11-cv-05502; 

Best Buy Co., Inc., et al. v. Hitachi, Ltd., et al., 

No. 11-cv-05513; 

Target Corp., et al. v. Chunghwa Picture Tubes, 

Ltd., et al., No. 11-cv-05514; 

Interbond Corporation of America v. Hitachi, et 

al., No. 11-cv-06275; 

Office Depot, Inc. v. Hitachi, Ltd., et al., No. 

11-cv-06276; 

CompuCom Systems, Inc. v. Hitachi, Ltd. et al., 

No. 11-cv-06396; 

Costco Wholesale Corporation v. Hitachi, Ltd., et 

al., No. 11-cv-06397; 

P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corporation, et 

al. v. Hitachi, Ltd., et al., No. 12-cv-02648; 

Schultze Agency Services, LLC v. Hitachi, Ltd., 

et al., No. 12-cv-02649; 

Tech Data Corporation, et al. v. Hitachi, Ltd., et 

al., No. 13-cv-00157; 

Sharp Electronics Corp., et al. v. Hitachi, Ltd., et

Master File No. M:07-5994-SC

MDL No. 1917 

Case No. 3:11-cv-05513-SC 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER EXTENDING THE 

DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO 

COMPEL PHILIPS TO RESPOND 

TO DIRECT ACTION PLAINTIFFS 

AND INDIRECT PURCHASER 

PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF 

REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 2884 Filed 10/02/14 Page 1 of 5
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

 

60835670.1 - 2 - 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING THE 

DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL PHILIPS TO 

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR

ADMISSION

al., No. 13-cv-01173; 

Dell Inc. and Dell Products L.P. v. Hitachi, Ltd., 

et al., No. 13-cv-02171; 

Sharp Electronics Corp. et al. v. Koninklijke 

Philips Electronics, N.V., et al., No. 13-cv02776; 

Siegel v. Technicolor SA, et al., No. 13-cv-05261; 

Sears, Roebuck and Co., et al. v. Technicolor SA, 

No. 13-cv-05262; 

Best Buy Co., Inc., et al. v. Technicolor SA, et al., 

No. 13-cv-05264; 

Schultze Agency Services, LLC v. Technicolor 

SA, et al., No. 13-cv-05668; 

Target Corp., v. Technicolor SA, et al., No. 13-

cv-05686; 

Costco Wholesale Corporation v. Technicolor 

SA,, et al., No. 13-cv-005723; 

Electrograph Systems, Inc., et al. v. Technicolor 

SA, et al., No. 13-cv-05724; 

P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corporation, et 

al. v. Technicolor SA, et al., No. 13-cv-05725; 

Office Depot, Inc. v. Technicolor SA, et al., No. 

13-cv-05726; 

Interbond Corporation of America v. Technicolor 

SA, et al., No. 13-cv-05727. 

ViewSonic Corporation, v. Chunghwa Picture 

Tubes, Ltd., et al., 3:14cv-02510; 

The Indirect Purchaser Action.

This Stipulation and Proposed Order Extending the Deadline to File Motion to Compel 

Philips to Respond to Direct Action Plaintiffs and Indirect Purchaser Plaintiff’s First Set of 

Requests for Admission between the Direct Action Plaintiffs and Indirect Purchaser Class 

(collectively “Plaintiffs”), on the one hand, and defendants Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. 

and Philips Electronics North America Corporation (collectively, “Philips”), on the other hand, is 

made with respect to the following facts and recitals: 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 2884 Filed 10/02/14 Page 2 of 5
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

 

60835670.1 - 3 - 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING THE 

DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL PHILIPS TO 

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR

ADMISSION

WHEREAS, on March 21, 2014, the Court entered a scheduling order setting the close of 

fact discovery for September 5, 2014. See Dkt. No. 2459; 

WHEREAS, the deadline to file any motion to compel after the discover cut-off is 

September 12, 2014 (L.R. 37-3); 

WHEREAS, on August 1, 2014, the Plaintiffs served their First Set of Requests for 

Admission on Philips; 

WHEREAS, on September 5, 2014, Philips served its Responses to Plaintiffs’ First Set of 

Requests for Admission and stated objections on various grounds; 

WHEREAS, on September 10, 2014, counsel for the undersigned parties held telephonic 

meet and confers to discuss deficiencies in Philips’ responses identified by Plaintiffs and have a 

bona fide intent to continue doing so; 

WHEREAS, the Plaintiffs and Philips have conferred by and through their counsel and, 

subject to the Court’s approval, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 

1. Subject to the parties’ meet and confer discussion, the Plaintiffs provided Philips 

with a revised list of documents. 

2. Subject to the parties’ meet and confer discussion, Philips will review the revised 

list for inclusion on a declaration or stipulation related to their authenticity and 

business record status by September 26, 2014. 

3. The undersigned parties agree to extend the deadline for the Plaintiffs to file a 

motion to compel relating to the Plaintiffs First Set of Requests for Admission, to 

the extent one is deemed necessary by Plaintiffs, to October 3, 2014. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: _________________ _____________________________________ 

 Hon. Samuel Conti 

 United States District Court Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

APPROVED

Judge Samuel Conti

October 2, 2014

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 2884 Filed 10/02/14 Page 3 of 5
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

 

60835670.1 - 4 - 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING THE 

DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL PHILIPS TO 

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR

ADMISSION

DATED: September 12, 2014 

ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P.

By: /s/ Laura E. Nelson_______________ 

Roman M. Silberfeld 

David Martinez 

Laura E. Nelson 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Best Buy Co., Inc.; Best Buy Purchasing LLC; Best Buy Enterprise Services, Inc.; Best Buy Stores, L.P.; BESTBUY.COM, LLC; Magnolia 

Hi-Fi, LLC

/s/ Lauren C. Russell 

Lauren C. Russell 

TRUMP ALIOTO TRUMP & PRESCOTT 

ATTORNEYS LLP 

2280 Union Street 

San Francisco, CA 94123 

Telephone: 415.563.7200 

Fax: 415.346.0679 

Lead Counsel for the Indirect 

Purchaser Plaintiffs 

By: /s/ Charles Malaise ___________ 

Charles Malaise 

charles.malaise@bakerbotts.com 

BAKER BOTTS LLP 

1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20004-2400 

Telephone: (202) 639-1117 

Facsimile: (202) 585-1037 

Attorneys for Defendants Koninklijke Philips 

N.V. and Philips Electronics North America 

Corporation

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 2884 Filed 10/02/14 Page 4 of 5
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER 

&

CIRESI L.L.P. 

ATTORNEYS 

AT 

LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

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 

60835670.1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 2884 Filed 10/02/14 Page 5 of 5