Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-md-01827/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-md-01827-186/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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST

LITIGATION

 /

This Order Relates to:

ALL CASES

 /

No. M 07-1827 SI

MDL. No. 1827

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART INDIRECT

PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION

TO MODIFY CERTAIN

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE

SPECIAL MASTER’S “ORDER RE:

DEPOSITION PROTOCOL”; ADOPTING

ORDER RE: DEPOSITION PROTOCOL

AS MODIFIED

On April 30, 2010, the Court heard argument on the indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ motion to

modify certain aspects of the Special Master’s February 17, 2010 Order Re: Deposition Protocol. As

discussed at the hearing, the Court finds that Order Re: Deposition Protocol should be entered as drafted

by the Special Master, with the following modification: Paragraph XI “Standard Stipulation” is amended

to state that any witness who makes changes to his or her deposition transcript must, as required by

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e)(2), “sign a statement listing the changes and the reasons for

making them.” Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 30(e)(2). 

The Court finds that the other modifications advocated by the indirect purchaser plaintiffs are

unnecessary. The Order Re: Deposition Protocol should be interpreted in harmony with the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Evidence, and if specific issues arise, the parties may

raise them with the Special Master and the Court. With regard to translations during depositions, the

Court finds that objections and colloquy between counsel should be translated for non-English speaking

deponents so those witnesses have the opportunity to understand what is happening. Counsel are

Case 3:07-md-01827-SI Document 1730 Filed 05/04/10 Page 1 of 2
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

reminded not to make speaking objections and not to engage in extended colloquy; if there are any

problems in this regard, counsel should contact the Special Master. Regarding the location of

depositions, the Court finds it appropriate that depositions of foreign witnesses should presumptively

occur in the Northern District of California, as provided in the Order Re: Deposition Protocol. Counsel

are directed to cooperate regarding scheduling depositions, including clustering depositions when

appropriate. If counsel are unable to agree on the location or scheduling of depositions, counsel shall

contact the Special Master.

Accordingly, the Court ENTERS the Order Re: Deposition Protocol, as modified by this Order

(Docket No. 1546). The indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ motion to modify the Order Re: Deposition

Protocol is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. (Docket Nos. 1574 & 1590).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2010 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-md-01827-SI Document 1730 Filed 05/04/10 Page 2 of 2