Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-01459/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-01459-0/pdf.json

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

---

SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

A Limited Liability Partnership

Including Professional Corporations

GARY L. HALLING, Cal. Bar No. 66087

JAMES L. MCGINNIS, Cal. Bar No. 95788

MONA SOLOUKI, Cal. Bar No. 215145

Four Embareadero Center, 17th Floor

San Francisco, California 94111-4109

Telephone: 415-434-9100

Facsimile: 415-434-3947

Email: ghalling@sheppardmullin.com

Email: jmcginnnis(ashe parcl ullin.com

Email: msoloukl@sheppardmullin.com

Attorneys for Defendant

SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, INC.

10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRONG NGUYEN, on behalf of himself and

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff

V.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., et

al.,

Defendants.

THIS STIPULATION ALSO RELATES TO

THE FOLLOWING RELATED CASES BY

ORDER OF MARCH 14,2007:

A Computer Place, Inc. v. Samsung

Electronics, Co., Ltd.

Case No. C-07-01020-WHA

Burke v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et al.

Case No. C-07-01236-MJJ

Miller v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et al.

Case No. C-07-01147-EDL

THIS STIPULATION ALSO RELATES TO

THE FOLLOWING CASES SUBJECT TO

MOTIONS TO RELATE, FILED MARCH

15, 2007:

CASE NO. 07-0086-SBA

JOINT STIPULATION AND

]PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING

TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

AND COMPLAINTS IN RELATED

ACTIONS

The Hon. Saundra B. Armstrong

Amended Complaint filed Jan. 18, 2007

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 1 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 1 of 8
2

Alderman v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et

al.

3

4

5

6

8

9

0

1

12

13

4

15

16

17

18

19

20

2

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Case No. C-07-1489-MJJ

Burt v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et al.

Case No. C-07-1388-MMC

Perkins v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et

al.

Case No. C-07-1360-JL

TechToysForLess v. Samsung Electronics, Co.,

Ltd_ et al.

Case No. C-07-1418-SC

Hash v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et al.

Case No. C-07-1459-JCS

Krahmer v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd., et

al.

Case No. C-07-1460-SC

THIS STIPULATION ALSO RELATES TO

THE FOLLOWING CASES SUBJECT TO

THE MOTION TO RELATE, FILED APRIL

3, 2007:

Kevin's Computer and Photo v. Samsung

Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.

Case No. C-07-1665-MJJ

Theisen v. Hitachi, Ltd., et al.

Case No. C-07-1680-BZ

Greenwell v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et

al.

Case No. C-07-1524-EDL

Sweatman v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et

al.

Case No. C-07-1613-MEJ

Pellitteri v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et

al.

Case No. C-07-1614-JSW

Davis v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al,

Case No. C-07-1735-MEJ

McClellan-Chambers v. Samsung Electronics

Co., Ltd., et al.

W02-WESTYN0\400255422.5 -2

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 2 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 2 of 8
Juskiewicz v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et

al.

Case No. C-07-1829-JL

WHEREAS the undersigned Plaintiff Trong Nguyen has filed a Complaint in the

above-captioned case on or about January 5, 2007;

WHEREAS the additional, undersigned Plaintiffs have filed Complaints in the

above-captioned cases since Plaintiff Nguyen filed his case;

WHEREAS in all of the Complaints, Plaintiffs allege price fixing by

manufacturers of Flash Memory;

WHEREAS more than eighteen complaints have been filed to date in the Northern

District of California and one complaint has been filed in the Southern District of New York by

plaintiffs bringing class actions on behalf of either direct or indirect purchasers alleging price

fixing by manufacturers of Flash Memory (collectively, "the Flash Memory Cases");

WHEREAS a motion is currently pending before the Judicial Panel on

Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") to transfer the Flash Memory Cases to a single judge for

consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407;

WHEREAS this Court recently related three of the Flash Memory Cases pending

in the Northern District of California to this action, and other motions are currently pending

before the Court to consider whether additional actions pending in this District should be related;

WHEREAS the parties believe that the Flash Memory Cases will be consolidated

or coordinated either as ultidistrict litigation ("MDL") or as a group of related cases within the

Northern District of California, and anticipate that, in either instance, Plaintiffs will likely file

separate Consolidated Amended Complaints for the direct and indirect Flash Memory Cases;

WHEREAS the parties have agreed that an orderly schedule for any response to

the pleadings in the Flash Memory Cases is more efficient for the parties and for the Court;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs agree that the deadline for Samsung Semiconductor, Inc.

("SST") to respond to the Complaints in each of the above-captioned cases, and any other cases

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND W02MWEST:FN0\400255422.5

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 3 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 3 of 8
subsequently related or transferred to this Court, shall be extended until the earlier of the

following two dates: (1) forty-five days after the filing of Consolidated Amended Complaints in

the direct and indirect Flash Memory Cases either in the MDL transferee Court or in the Court in

which the Flash Memory Cases pending in this District are consolidated and/or coordinated in the

Northern District of California; or (2) forty-five days after Plaintiffs provide written notice to SSI

that they do not intend to file Consolidated Amended Complaints in the direct and indirect Flash

emory Cases, provided that such notice may be given only at or after the initial case

management conference either in the MDL transferee Court or in the Court in which all Flash

Memory Cases pending in this District are consolidated and/or coordinated in the Northern

10 11 District of California;

1 WHEREAS Plaintiffs further agree that this extension is available, without further

12 stipulation with counsel for Plaintiffs, to all named Defendants who notify Plaintiffs in writing of

13 their intention to join this extension;

14 WHEREAS Plaintiffs and Defendant SSI (and any other named Defendants who

5 provide notice of their intention to join this extension pursuant to the preceding paragraph) agree

16 that each such defense counsel shall accept service on behalf of the Defendant that provided

17 notice of its intention to join this extension of all complaints in the above-captioned matter,

18 including any amended or consolidated complaints, and further, that such Defendant shall not

19 contest the sufficiency of process or service of process. This Stipulation does not constitute a

20 waiver of any other defense, including but not limited to, the defense of lacy of personal or

21 subject matter jurisdiction;

22

23 PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT SSI, BY AND THROUGH THEIR

24 RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:

25 1. The deadline for Defendant SSI to respond to the Complaints in the above26 captioned cases, and any other cases subsequently related or transferred to this Court, shall be

27 extended until the earlier of the following two dates: (1) forty-five days after the ding of

28 Consolidated Amended Complaints in the direct and indirect Flash Memory Cases either in the

W02-WEST:FNO\400255422.5 -4- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 4 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 4 of 8
3

4

5

6

7

9

10

II

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

MDL transferee Court or in the Court in which the Flash Memory Cases pending in this District

are consolidated and/or coordinated in the Northern District of California; or (2) forty-five days

after Plaintiffs provide written notice to SST that they do not intend to file Consolidated Amended

Complaints in the direct and indirect Flash Memory Cases, provided that such notice may be

given only at or after the initial case management conference either in the MDL transferee Court

or in the Court in which all Flash Memory Cases pending in this District are consolidated and/or

coordinated in the Northern District of California.

2. This extension is available, without further stipulation with counsel for

Plaintiffs, to all named Defendants who notify Plaintiffs in writing of their intention to join this

extension.

3. Defendant SSI (and any other named Defendants who provide notice of

their intention to join this extension pursuant to the preceding paragraph) agree that each such

defense counsel shall accept service on behalf of the defendant that provided notice of its

intention to join the extension of all complaints in the above-captioned matter, including any

amended or consolidated complaints, and further, that such defendant shall not contest the

sufficiency of process or service of process. This Stipulation does not constitute a waiver of any

other defense, including but not limited to, the defense of lacy of personal or subject matter

jurisdiction.

Plaintiffs and Defendant SSI (and any other named Defendants who 4.

provide notice of their intention to join this extension pursuant to the preceding paragraph) agree

that notwithstanding the above paragraphs, should any defendant to whom this extension applies

respond to any complaint in another plash Memory case filed in another United States District

Court or a state court prior to the date contemplated by this Stipulation, then such defendant shall

make a simultaneous response to the complaint in the above-captioned matter.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

26

27

28

w0e-wEsr:Fv0\400255422.5 -5 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 5 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 5 of 8
Dated: April 11, 2007 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

2

3

4

5

By:Isf Mona Solouki

Mona Solouki

Attorneysfor Defendant Samsung Semiconductor,

Inc.

PEARSON, SIMON, SOTER, WARSHAW &

PENNY LLP 6

Dated: April 11, 2007

7

8

9

10

1

12

3

14

By: Isl Bruce L. Simon

Bruce L. Simon

Attorneys for Plaintiff A Computer Place

Dated: April 11, 2007 FURTH LEHMANN & GRANT LLP

By: /s/ Christopher L. Lebsock

Christopher L. Lebsock

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Nguyen, Burt, Miller,

Perkins and TechToysForLess

ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL MASON & GETTE

LLP

Dated: April 11, 2007 15

16

7

18

19

20

By: /sl Christopher Micheletti

Christopher Micheletti

Attorneysfor Plaintiffs Nguyen, Burke, Burt,

Miller, Perkins, TechToysForLess

STEYER LOWENTHAL BOODROOKAS

ALVAREZ & SMITH LLP

2 Dated: April 11, 2007

22

23

24

25

26

BY: /s/ Allan Steyer T

Allan Steyer

Attorneysfor Plaintiffs Nguyen, Miller, Burt, Huh,

Krahmer, Sweatman, Pellitteri, Davis, McClellanChambers and Jamac Enterprises d1blal Elite

Custom Computers, Inc.

27

28

W02-WEST:FN014 00 2 5 54 22.5 -6

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSEDI

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 6 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 6 of 8
2

3

4

5

Dated: April 11, 2007 LIEF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN,

LLP

By: /s/ Eric B. Fastiff

Eric B. Fastiff

Attorneysfor PlaintiffAlderman

6

Dated: April 11, 2007 THE TERRELL LAW GROUP

12

13

14

15

6

17

18

19

20

21

22

8

9

0 Dated: April 11, 2007

1

Dated: April 11, 2007

Dated: April 11, 2007

By: /s/ Reginald Terrell

Reginald Terrell

Attorneys for Plaintiff Greenwell

LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH M. PATANE

By. /s/ Joe Patane

Joe Patane

Attorneysfor Plaintiffduskiewicz

BERMAN, DEVALERIO, PEASE TABACCO,

BURT & PUCILLO

Joseph J. Tabacco Jr.

Christopher T. Heffelfinger

KOHN, SWIFT & GRAF, P.C.

Joseph Kohn

William E. Hoese

By: /s/ Christopher T. Heffelfin er

Christopher T. Heffelfinger

Attorneysfor PlaintiffKevin's Computer and Photo

GROSS & BELSKY LLP

23

24

25

By: /s/ Terry Gross

Terry Gross

Attorneysfor PlaintiffTheisen

26

27

28

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND W 02-WEST:FNOi400255422,5 -7

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 7 of 8
 Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 7 of 8
2

3

4

5

6

8

9

0

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, to conserve party and judicial resources, and

in light of the proceedings currently pending before the JPML to consolidate and transfer all

pending Flash Memory Cases to one Court, and pending motions in this Court to consider

whether additional cases should be related, this extension is available in ALL RELATED

ACTIONS (both current and to be related in the future) to any defendant that provides written

notice to plaintiff's counsel in such action of this Order and its intention to join this extension,

without further stipulation with counsel for plaintiff(s) in the related actions.

Honorable Saundra B. Armstrong

Judge of the United States District Court

Dated:

11

12

13

14

5

16

17

18

9

20

2

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

W02-WEST:FNO\400255422.5 - 8

JOINT STIPULATION' AND 1PROPOSED]

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND

Case 3:07-cv-01459-JCS Document 5 Filed 04/11/2007 Page 8 of 8

4/16/07

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Joseph C. Spero

Joseph C. Spero

Case 4:07-cv-01459-SBA Document 6 Filed 04/16/07 Page 8 of 8