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

1

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Jennifer Milici, D.C. Bar No. 987096

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

(202) 326-2912; (202) 326-3496 (fax)

jmilici@ftc.gov

Lin W. Kahn, Cal. Bar No. 261387

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

901 Market Street, Suite 570

San Francisco, CA 94103

(415) 848-5115; (415) 848-5184 (fax)

lkahn@ftc.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission in Case No. 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

Kalpana Srinivasan (237460)

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950

Los Angeles, CA 90067

(310) 789-3100; (310) 789-3006 (fax)

ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com

COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY

Steven N. Williams (175481)

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200

Burlingame, CA 94010

(650) 697-6000; (650) 697-0577 (fax)

swilliams@cpmlegal.com

Plaintiffs’ Interim Co-Lead Counsel in Case No. 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

Gary A. Bornstein (pro hac vice)

Yonatan Even (pro hac vice)

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, New York 10019-7475

(212) 474-1000; (212) 474-3700 (fax)

gbornstein@cravath.com

yeven@cravath.com

KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP

Robert A. Van Nest (SBN 84065)

633 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1809

(415) 391-5400; (415) 397-7188 (fax)

rvannest@keker.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

Donn P. Pickett (SBN 72257)

Geoffrey T. Holtz (SBN 191370)

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105-1596

(415) 442-1000; (415) 442-1001 (fax)

donn.pickett@morganlewis.com

geoffrey.holtz@morganlewis.com

Attorneys for Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

Additional counsel listed on signature pages

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, a

Delaware Corporation,

 Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC
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

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERY COORDINATION ORDER

WHEREAS the Parties desire to minimize the burden and expense of duplicative discovery 

across cases;

WHEREAS the Parties agree that discovery in the above-captioned actions should be 

coordinated as provided herein; and

WHEREAS the Parties are continuing to meet and confer with each other and with Apple Inc. 

regarding the possibility of further coordination of discovery in the above-captioned actions with 

discovery in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated, Case No. 17-cv-00108-GPC (S.D. Cal.) and 

related cases;

THE PARTIES THEREFORE STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1. For the purpose of this Order:

a. “Contact Attorneys” refers to counsel designated by each Party and identified on 

Schedule A.

b. “FTC” refers to the Federal Trade Commission.

c. “FTC Litigation” refers to Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated, 

Case No. 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC.

d. “MDL Litigation” refers to In re Qualcomm Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 17-md02773-LHK-NMC, including all consolidated member cases (both current and any 

that may be transferred and consolidated in the future).

e. “MDL Plaintiffs” refers collectively to the plaintiffs named in any consolidated or 

member case in the MDL Litigation, including in any consolidated complaint that is 

filed in the MDL Litigation. 

f. “Parties” refers collectively to the FTC, MDL Plaintiffs, and Qualcomm.

IN RE: QUALCOMM ANTITRUST 

LITIGATION

Case No. 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC
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

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

g. “Party” refers to any of the FTC, MDL Plaintiffs, or Qualcomm.

h. “Pending Cases” refers collectively to the FTC Litigation and MDL Litigation.

i. “Protective Orders” refers to the Protective Order and Supplemental Protective Order 

in the FTC Litigation (ECF Nos. 81, 137) and the Protective Order in the MDL 

Litigation (ECF No. 46), in each case as may be supplemented and amended from 

time to time.

j. “Qualcomm” refers to Qualcomm Incorporated.

2. Counsel for the Parties in each Pending Case shall be bound by this Order. 

COORDINATION OF WRITTEN DISCOVERY

3. Any Party that serves or has served a written discovery request under Rule 31, 33, 34, or 

36 on another Party in any of the Pending Cases shall provide a copy of the request to the Contact 

Attorneys in each Pending Case.

4. Any Party that responds or has responded to a written discovery request in any of the 

Pending Cases shall serve its response and produce any responsive materials to the Contact 

Attorneys in each Pending Case.

5. A Party (the “Issuing Party”) that serves, after issuance of this Order, a subpoena or other 

request (including any request for international judicial assistance) for the production of documents 

or other materials on a person or entity not a Party (“Non-Party”) to any Pending Case shall promptly 

(a) provide a copy of the subpoena or other request to all Contact Attorneys; (b) provide a copy of 

this Order and the Protective Orders in effect in each of the Pending Cases to the Non-Party; (c) 

notify the Non-Party that, pursuant to this Order, materials produced in response to such subpoena or 

other request will be produced in each Pending Case; and (d) request that the Non-Party 

simultaneously produce materials to the Contact Attorneys in each Pending Case. If, 

notwithstanding such request, the Non-Party does not produce the materials to the Contact Attorneys 

in each Pending Case, the issuing Party shall, as permitted by law, provide a copy of all materials 

produced pursuant to the subpoena or other request to the Contact Attorneys in each of the Pending 

Cases within five (5) calendar days after receipt of the materials from the Non-Party. If a Party has 

served a Non-Party subpoena or other document request prior to the issuance of this Order, the 
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

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Issuing Party will advise the Non-Party that the document production is to be shared across the 

Pending Cases and provide an opportunity of 10 (ten) days to object, and shall provide a copy of all 

materials produced pursuant to the subpoena or other request to the Contact Attorneys in each of the 

Pending Cases within five (5) calendar days after the later of (1) expiration of such ten (10) day 

period, or (2) the Party’s receipt of materials from the Non-Party.

1 If a Party modifies or extends the 

time to respond to a Rule 45 document subpoena or other request in writing, it shall promptly inform 

Contact Attorneys in each Pending Case of that written extension or modification.

6. All written responses to discovery requests and subpoenas and materials provided in 

response to discovery requests and subpoenas in any Pending Case shall be treated as having been 

obtained through discovery in each Pending Case. 

COORDINATION OF DEPOSITIONS

7. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2)(A), leave is granted to all Parties to conduct in excess 

of ten (10) depositions per side. 

8. A Party issuing a deposition notice or subpoena or seeking a request for international 

judicial assistance in obtaining testimony (the “Subpoenaing Party”) shall provide at least five (5) 

days advance notice to Contact Attorneys in each Pending Case. Other Parties shall be entitled to 

join the Subpoenaing Party’s notice, subpoena, or request by notice to Contact Attorneys in each 

Pending Case within such five (5) day period. The other Parties also will be entitled to add topics to 

any 30(b)(6) or similar subpoena or notice by issuing their own Rule 30(b)(6) notice. The Parties 

shall make reasonable good-faith efforts to coordinate the scheduling of the deposition with each 

other and with any Non-Party witness, provided, however, that no Party may unreasonably delay a 

deposition. 

9. For Party depositions, prior to issuing a notice for a date certain, the noticing Party shall 

notify the Contact Attorneys for all Parties of its intent to depose a particular witness, and request 

 1 Pending the resolution of any such Non-Party objection to production across the Pending Cases, 

the Issuing Party shall nonetheless provide a copy of all materials to the other side within the 

Pending Case in which the subpoena or request was issued, in accordance with the applicable 

protective order, within five (5) calendar days after receipt of the materials from the Non-Party, to 

the extent the Non-Party has not already done so.
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

5

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

available dates for the witness from counsel for the Party whose witness’s deposition is sought. 

Within seven (7) business days of receiving the request, the Party to whom such a request is made 

shall provide three (3) proposed deposition dates, provided, however, that this deadline shall be 

extended to twelve (12) business days if a noticing Party has more than five deposition date requests 

to another Party outstanding at the time such request is made. The noticing Party shall use its best 

efforts to schedule the deposition on a proposed deposition date mutually agreeable to all Parties. 

The Party whose witness’s deposition is sought shall retain its right to formally object (by motion for 

protective order or otherwise) to the taking of a particular deposition or to the timing or scope of 

such deposition.

10. Counsel in any of the Pending Cases shall be entitled to attend depositions noticed in each 

Pending Case, so long as they are bound by the Protective Order entered in one of the Pending Cases. 

Non-noticing counsel may ask questions and raise objections at depositions to the extent allowed 

under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Any Party may avail itself of any objection to the form 

of a question made by any other Party properly in attendance at a deposition without the need to be 

in attendance or express its joinder in the objection. 

11. The time limits on depositions established by Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(2) shall apply to all 

depositions, except that in the event that a deposition of a non-party is noticed by multiple Parties, 

the Parties agree that, absent good cause, they will not oppose an extension of the time limit for that 

deposition to up to fourteen (14) hours. In any deposition of Qualcomm or a current or former 

Qualcomm employee noticed in his or her individual capacity by the FTC and the MDL Plaintiffs, 

the FTC and the MDL Plaintiffs shall be entitled to no more than eleven (11) hours of questioning 

time, except that the parties may modify this limit by agreement or leave of Court. 

12. A Party that was provided prior notice of a deposition in any Pending Case may not, 

absent leave of Court, notice a second deposition of the same witness in a Pending Case.

13. Depositions subpoenaed, noticed, and/or taken in any of the Pending Cases shall be 

treated as if they were obtained through discovery in each Pending Case.
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

6

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS

14. Any Party that serves or has served a pleading or motion on another Party in any Pending 

case shall serve an unredacted copy of the pleading or motion on the Contact Attorneys in each 

Pending Case, subject if necessary to the Protective Orders in that case.

PROTECTION OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

15. The Protective Order in effect in each Pending Case is hereby modified to permit the 

disclosure and production of Protected Material (as defined therein) to each Party hereto, and the use 

of such material by each Party hereto, as if they were a Party to the Protective Order in each Pending 

Case.

16. The Protective Order in effect in each Pending Case shall govern the handling by the 

Parties to such Pending Case of protected material produced hereunder, and, unless modified by the 

designating party, confidentiality designations applied in one Pending Case shall apply in all Pending 

Cases.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

Dated: September 20, 2017

By: /s/ Jennifer Milici

Jennifer Milici

J. Alexander Ansaldo

Joseph R. Baker

Daniel Matheson

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

(202) 326-2912; (202) 326-3496 (fax)

jmilici@ftc.gov

jansaldo@ftc.gov

jbaker1@ftc.gov

dmatheson@ftc.gov
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

7

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Lin W. Kahn, Cal. Bar No. 261387

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

901 Market Street, Suite 570

San Francisco, CA 94103

(415) 848-5115; (415) 848-5184 (fax)

lkahn@ftc.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff Federal Trade 

Commission in Case No. 17-cv-00220

Dated: September 20, 2017

By: /s/ Kalpana Srinivasan

Kalpana Srinivasan

Marc M. Seltzer

Steven G. Sklaver

Amanda Bonn

Oleg Elkhunovich

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Telephone: (310) 789-3100

Facsimile: (310) 789-3006

Email: ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com

Email: mseltzer@susmangodfrey.com

Email: ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com

Email: abonn@susmangodfrey.com

Email: oelkhunovich@susmangodfrey.com

Joseph Grinstein

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1000 Louisiana Street # 5100

Houston, TX 77002

Telephone: (713) 651-9366

Facsimile: (713) 654-6666

Email: jgrinstein@susmangodfrey.com

Steven N. Williams

Mark F. Ram

Joyce M. Chang

Brian Danitz

COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200

Burlingame, CA 94010

Telephone: (650) 697-6000

Facsimile: (650) 697-0577

Email: swilliams@cpmlegal.com

Email: mram@cpmlegal.com

Email: jchang@cpmlegal.com

Email: bdanitz@cpmlegal.com

Plaintiffs’ Interim Co-Lead Counsel in 

Case No. 17-md-02773
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

8

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Steve W. Berman

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO 

LLP

1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300

Seattle, WA 98101

Telephone: (206) 268-9320

Facsimile: (206) 623-0594

Email: steve@hbsslaw.com

Jeff D. Friedman (173886)

Rio S. Pierce (298297)

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO 

LLP

715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202

Berkeley, CA 94710

Telephone: (510) 725-3000

Facsimile: (510) 725-3001

Email: jefff@hbsslaw.com

Email: riop@hbsslaw.com

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee in Case No. 

17-md-02773

Dated: September 20, 2017

By: /s/ Gary A. Bornstein

Gary A. Bornstein

Yonatan Even

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

Worldwide Plaza

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10019

Tel: (212) 474-1000

Fax: (212) 474-3700

gbornstein@cravath.com

yeven@cravath.com

Robert A. Van Nest

Asim M. Bhansali

Eugene M. Paige

Justina Sessions

David W. Rizk

Alexander Dryer

KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP

633 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1809

Telephone: (415) 391-5400

Facsimile: (415) 397-7188

rvannest@keker.com

abhansali@keker.com

epaige@keker.com

jsessions@keker.com

drizk@keker.com

adryer@keker.com
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

9

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Richard S. Taffet

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

101 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10178-0060

Tel: (212) 309-6000

Fax: (212) 309-6001

richard.taffet@morganlewis.com

Willard K. Tom

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW

Washington, DC 20004-2541

Tel: (202) 739-3000

Fax: (202) 739 3001

willard.tom@morganlewis.com

Donn P. Pickett

Geoffrey T. Holtz

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105-1126

Tel: (415) 442-1000

Fax: (415) 442-1001

donn.pickett@morganlewis.com

geoffrey.holtz@morganlewis.com

Attorneys for Defendant Qualcomm 

Incorporated
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

10

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

FILER’S ATTESTATION

I, Jennifer Milici, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to file 

this Joint Case Management Conference Statement. In compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I 

hereby attest that the signatories on this document have concurred in this filing.

 /s/ Jennifer Milici 
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

11

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

[PROPOSED] DISCOVERY COORDINATION ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ________________________ September 22, 2017 _____________________________________
A-1

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 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

SCHEDULE A

Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated, Case No. 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission

Jennifer Milici, jmilici@ftc.gov

J. Alexander Ansaldo, jansaldo@ftc.gov

Joseph R. Baker, jbaker1@ftc.gov

Daniel Matheson, dmatheson@ftc.gov

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

Gary A. Bornstein, gbornstein@cravath.com

Yonatan Even, yeven@cravath.com

Nicole M. Peles, npeles@cravath.com

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

Worldwide Plaza

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10019

Robert A. Van Nest, rvannest@keker.com

Asim M. Bhansali, abhansali@keker.com

Eugene M. Paige, epaige@keker.com

Justina Sessions, jsessions@keker.com

David W. Rizk, drizk@keker.com

Alexander Dryer, adryer@keker.com

KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP

633 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1809

Richard S. Taffet, richard.taffet@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

101 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10178-0060

Willard K. Tom, willard.tom@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW

Washington, DC 20004-2541

Donn P. Pickett, donn.pickett@morganlewis.com

Geoffrey T. Holtz, geoffrey.holtz@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105-1126
A-2

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 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

In re Qualcomm Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Plaintiffs’ Interim Co-Lead Counsel

Kalpana Srinivasan, ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com

Marc M. Seltzer, mseltzer@susmangodfrey.com

Steven G. Sklaver, ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com

Amanda Bonn, abonn@susmangodfrey.com

Oleg Elkhunovich, oelkhunovich@susmangodfrey.com

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 950

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Joseph Grinstein, jgrinstein@susmangodfrey.com

SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.

1000 Louisiana Street # 5100

Houston, TX 77002

Steven N. Williams, swilliams@cpmlegal.com

Mark F. Ram, mram@cpmlegal.com

Joyce M. Chang, jchang@cpmlegal.com

Brian Danitz, bdanitz@cpmlegal.com

COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200

Burlingame, CA 94010

Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee

Steve W. Berman, steve@hbsslaw.com

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300

Seattle, WA 98101

Jeff D. Friedman (173886), jefff@hbsslaw.com

Rio S. Pierce (298297), riop@hbsslaw.com

HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202

Berkeley, CA 94710

Telephone: (510) 725-3000

Facsimile: (510) 725-3001

Defendant Qualcomm Incorporated

Gary A. Bornstein, gbornstein@cravath.com

Yonatan Even, yeven@cravath.com

Nicole M. Peles, npeles@cravath.com

CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP

Worldwide Plaza

825 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10019

Robert A. Van Nest, rvannest@keker.com
A-3

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 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] DISCOVERYCOORDINATION ORDER

Case Nos.: 17-cv-00220-LHK-NMC, 17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Asim M. Bhansali, abhansali@keker.com

Eugene M. Paige, epaige@keker.com

Justina Sessions, jsessions@keker.com

David W. Rizk, drizk@keker.com

Alexander Dryer, adryer@keker.com

KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS LLP

633 Battery Street

San Francisco, CA 94111-1809

Richard S. Taffet, richard.taffet@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

101 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10178-0060

Willard K. Tom, willard.tom@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW

Washington, DC 20004-2541

Donn P. Pickett, donn.pickett@morganlewis.com

Geoffrey T. Holtz, geoffrey.holtz@morganlewis.com

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105-1126