Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-md-01486/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-md-01486-34/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS No. M-02-1486 PJH (JCS)

MEMORY (DRAM) ANTITRUST

LITIGATION,

___________________________________ ORDER AFTER 

DISCOVERY CONFERENCE

This document relates to:

ALL ACTIONS.

___________________________________/

TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD:

On April 21, 2006, the Court held a Discovery Conference. All parties attended through

their counsel. For the reasons stated on the record, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED as follows:

1. With respect to sales and transactional data, pursuant to Paragraph 5.b. of the Order

Re Discovery Plan in this matter, all Defendants represented that they have complied with this

provision of the Discovery Plan and have produced such data, with the following exceptions: the

Infineon, Nanya, Mosel, Winbond, and NEC groups of Defendants have received meet-and-confer

letters regarding sales and transactional data, and shall produce the remaining information on or

before April 28, 2006.

2. With respect to the documents to be produced by Defendants pursuant to Paragraph

3.a. of the Discovery Plan, all Defendants represented that they have complied with the Discovery

Plan and have produced these documents, except as follows: the Mosel, Infineon, and Elpida groups

of Defendants stated that they had a few additional documents to produce, which shall be produced

not later than April 28, 2006.

Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 814 Filed 04/25/06 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3. The Court has received a joint letter dated April 19, 2006, regarding a potential

discovery dispute between Plaintiffs and the Hynix group of Defendants. The parties announced at

the Discovery Conference that the issues raised by the April 19, 2006 letter have been resolved.

4. The Court received a joint letter dated April 17, 2006, from counsel for the Direct

Purchaser Plaintiffs and the Mosel group of Defendants regarding a discovery dispute. Good cause

appearing, and for the reasons stated on the record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

a) Plaintiffs’ work product objections to the Mosel Defendants’ Document

Request Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of the Mosel Defendants’ Joint First Request for

Production of Documents to Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs (the “Direct Purchaser

Request”) are OVERRULED. None of these document requests seek the

production of documents prepared in the anticipation of litigation.

b) Plaintiffs are ORDERED to produce all documents responsive to Request

Nos. 1 and 2 on or before June 7, 2006. Plaintiffs may produce such

documents by identifying the Bates numbers, if the Mosel Defendants already

have electronic copies of these documents. With respect to identified

documents that have been previously produced by non-parties to this

litigation, Plaintiffs shall produce electronic copies of those documents.

c) The Motion to Compel documents responsive to Request No. 3 is DENIED.

5. The Court has received a joint letter dated April 17, 2006, from counsel for the

Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs and the Mosel group of Defendants regarding a discovery dispute. It is

the same discovery dispute raised in the April 17, 2006 letter received from the Direct Purchaser

Plaintiffs and the Mosel group of Defendants. The Court hereby adopts its rulings with respect to

the Direct Purchasers’ letter as its rulings with respect to the Indirect Purchasers’ letter, except as

follows: the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs shall produce the documents required with respect to

Request Nos. 1 and 2 not later than thirty (30) days prior to the date set for Defendants to serve

expert reports on the merits of the Indirect Purchasers’ case.

The next Discovery Conference shall occur on June 23, 2006, at 9:30 a.m. Not earlier than

one (1) week before, counsel for the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs, the Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs,

Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 814 Filed 04/25/06 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Defendants shall file a joint letter with the Court regarding the matters that counsel wish to address

at the conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 25, 2006 

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:02-md-01486-PJH Document 814 Filed 04/25/06 Page 3 of 3