Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05944/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05944-336/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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, CASE NO. 07-cv-5944, MDL No. 1917 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT)

ANTITRUST LITIGATION 

This Document Relates to: 

All Indirect Purchaser Actions 

Case No. 07-5944 SC 

MDL No. 1917 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING FOR 

MOTIONS IN LIMINE FILED BY THE 

INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS, 

THE TOSHIBA DEFENDANTS AND THE 

SAMSUNG SDI DEFENDANTS 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Stipulation and Order Regarding Scheduling (Doc. No. 3182), 

the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (“IPPs”) filed nineteen motions in limine (“IPP motions in 

limine”)1

 on February 13, 2015; 

WHEREAS, on February 13, 2015, the Toshiba Defendants filed four separate motions in 

limine (“Toshiba separate motions in limine”)2

 and twelve motions in limine jointly with the other 

defendants (“Toshiba joint motions in limine”)3 that pertain to the IPPs; 

WHEREAS, on February 13, 2015, the Samsung SDI Defendants filed two separate 

 

1 See Doc. Nos. 3537, 3538, 3539, 3540, 3541, 3542, 3543, 3544, 3545, 3546, 3547, 3548, 3549, 

3550, 3551, 3552, 3553, 3554 and 3555. 

2 See Doc Nos. 3573, 3577, 3588 and 3576. 

3 See Doc Nos. 3556, 3557, 3559, 3563-3, 3568, 3571, 3572, 3579, 3581, 3583, 3589, and 3592. 

(Stipulating Parties on Signature Page) 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 3749 Filed 03/06/15 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

2 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, CASE NO. 07-cv-5944, MDL No. 1917 

motions in limine4 (“Samsung separate motions limine”) and twelve motions in limine jointly 

with the other defendants5 (“Samsung joint motions in limine”) that pertain to the IPPs; 

WHEREAS, IPPs’ MIL Nos. 3 (Doc. No. 3539) and 11 (Doc. No. 3547), and Defendants’ 

Joint MIL No. 14 (Doc. No. 3581), were resolved by stipulation dated February 27, 2015 (Doc. 

No. 3639); 

WHEREAS, SDI’s MIL No. 2 (Doc. No. 3565) was not opposed by IPPs; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Stipulation and Order Regarding Deadline for Briefing and 

Hearing Date for Motions in Limine (Doc. No. 3605) (the “MIL Order”), all parties filed 

responses to the motions pertaining to them on February 27, 2015;6

WHEREAS, pursuant to the MIL Order, replies in support of the motions in limine are due 

on March 6, 2015; 

WHEREAS, the Toshiba Defendants also filed a Motion to Strike Class Representatives 

with Inadequate Proof of Their Individual Purchases of Televisions or Monitors (Doc. No. 3595) 

(“Motion to Strike”); 

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Stipulation and Order Regarding Briefing for the Toshiba 

Defendants’ Motion to Decertify the Statewide IPP Classes for Damages and Motion to Strike 

Class Representatives with Inadequate Proof of their Individual Purchases of Televisions or 

Monitors (Doc. No. 3630), the IPPs’ opposition to the Motion to Strike is due on March 6, 2015 

and the Toshiba Defendants’ reply is due on March 17, 2015; 

WHEREAS, counsel for the IPPs, the Toshiba Defendants and the Samsung SDI 

Defendants have met and conferred and agree that an extension of the briefing schedule on these 

motions is appropriate and will aid in the efficient resolution of the litigation; 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the IPPs, the 

 

4 See Doc. Nos. 3560-61, 3565. 

5 See fn. 3, supra. 

6

 The IPPs and the Toshiba Defendants entered into a separate stipulation extending the briefing 

schedule for Defendants’ MIL #2 and DAP MIL #11, which became an order of the Court on 

February 25, 2015 (Doc No. 3631). Defendants’ MIL #2 and DAP MIL #11 are not the subject of 

this Stipulation and Proposed Order. 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 3749 Filed 03/06/15 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

3 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, CASE NO. 07-cv-5944, MDL No. 1917 

Toshiba Defendants and the Samsung SDI Defendants as follows: 

1. The replies in support of the IPPs’ motions in limine, the Toshiba and SDI separate 

motions in limine, and the Toshiba and SDI joint motions in limine (as they pertain to the IPPs) 

may be filed no later than March 16, 2015; 

2. IPPs’ opposition to the Toshiba Defendants’ Motion to Strike must be filed no later 

than March 16, 2015; 

3. The Toshiba Defendants’ reply in support of their Motion to Strike may be filed no 

later than March 27, 2015. 

The undersigned parties jointly and respectfully request that the Court enter this 

stipulation as an order. 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated:___________________ ______________________________________ Hon. Samuel Conti 

United States District Judge 

DATED: March 4, 2015 By: /s/ 

Mario N. Alioto (56433) 

Lauren C. Capurro (241151) 

TRUMP, ALIOTO, TRUMP & PRESCOTT LLP 

2280 Union Street 

San Francisco, CA 94123 

Telephone: (415) 563-7200 

Facsimile: (415) 346-0679 

malioto@tatp.com 

laurenrussell@tatp.com 

Lead Counsel for Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs

3/6/15

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 3749 Filed 03/06/15 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

4 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER, CASE NO. 07-cv-5944, MDL No. 1917 

DATED: March 4, 2015 

By: /s/ 

Christopher M. Curran (pro hac vice) 

ccurran@whitecase.com 

Lucius B. Lau (pro hac vice) 

alau@whitecase.com 

Dana E. Foster (pro hac vice) 

defoster@whitecase.com

701 Thirteenth Street, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20005 

tel.: (202) 626-3600 

fax: (202) 639-9355 

Counsel to Defendants Toshiba Corporation, 

Toshiba America, Inc., Toshiba America Information 

Systems, Inc., Toshiba America Consumer Products, 

L.L.C., and Toshiba America Electronic 

Components, Inc. 

DATED: March 4, 2015 SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON 

By: /s/ 

 GARY L. HALLING (SBN 66087) 

 E-mail: ghalling@sheppardmullin.com 

 JAMES L. MCGINNIS (SBN 95788) 

 E-mail: jmcginnis@sheppardmullin.com 

 MICHAEL W. SCARBOROUGH (SBN 203524) 

 E-mail: mscarborough@sheppardmullin.com 

 Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor 

 San Francisco, CA 94111 

 Telephone: (415) 434-9100 

 Facsimile: (415) 434-3947 

Counsel for Defendants Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., 

Samsung SDI America, Inc., Samsung SDI 

(Malaysia) SDN. BHD., Samsung SDI Mexico S.A. 

de C.V., Samsung SDI Brasil Ltda., Shenzen 

Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., and Tianjin Samsung SDI 

Co., Ltd. 

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i), the filer attests that the concurrence in the filing of this 

document has been obtained from each of the above signatories. 

Case 3:07-cv-05944-JST Document 3749 Filed 03/06/15 Page 4 of 4