Free Case Transferred In - District Transfer - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :05-cv—OO91_4;JJF Document 21 -8 Filed O1/‘1.2l2006 Page 1 of 4
I,/y’§llr¤ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Fltw
6, FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WU, SFP Q, ' _ ,
WESTERN DIVISION U i L ‘<> fn ~¤· 9*+
CORY WILES, individually and on behalf
of himself and all persons similarly situated, '°li" "ii ”“‘ Th": *0
Plaintiff, I
v. N0. 05-2605 B/An
INTEL conronarron, a ne1awai§é -:°’~-i"?$-——- »- »--- ii;--2
Corporation, I ‘ - n ‘ E i
‘ .u -- _l;f· ti *5gT-far; I ji - @
. " i ‘-—- = s; Li·\.fi., . [ W
Defendant. ‘ 1 Q; ·- T Ag j
Z ·;;;·;;’_;:··l~~·‘ 5
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-2, Defendant
Intel Corporation ("Intel”) hereby moves the Court for an order extending Intel’s response to I
Plaintiffs Amended Complaint to (1) the earlier of 60 days after transfer of the above _captioned
case pursuant to any motion to coordinate or consolidate pre-trial proceedings per 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407 or such time for response that the transferee Court may require for any action made
part of the Same MDL; or (2) 45 days after any Court order that removes the Plaintiff s action
from MDL treatment. Plaintiff does not oppose this motion. See Certificate of Compliance filed
concurrently. ln support of this motion, Defendant states:
1. This case was initially tiled on July ‘l5, 2005, in the Thirteenth Judicial District
Court ofthe State of Tennessee in and for Shelby County, entitled Cory Fldles, individually and
on behalf of himself and all persons similarly situated Plaintyf vs. Intel Corporation, a
Delaware Corporation, Defendant, as Civil Case No. CT 3801-05. On August 18, 2005, Intel
s»=iz1ssz144.1 @ I

Case 1:05-cv—OO914j:1JF Document 21-8 Filed O1/t,2<2006 Page 2 of 4
timely removed the action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. That same day, Plaintiff
tiled and a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). Intel’s response date to the FAC is September 7,
2005.
2. This case is one of 72 purported antitrust class action lawsuits tiled in the last 7
weeks against Intel alleging essentially identical facts and claims. See Attached Exhibit A, List E
of Related Actions.1 Sixty—seven (67) of these actions are subject to a pending petition to
coordinate or consolidate pre—trial proceedings per 28 U.S.C. Section 1407 (the MDL Petition).
This action has been identified as a related action in connection with the MDL Petition, and lntel _
has notified the Clerk of the Panel of this related case. See Attached Exhibit B. Intel filed a
response to this petition in support of coordination on August 1, 2005. This Petition has been T
fully briefed and the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML”) will hear arguments on
the petition on September 29, 2005, in Ashville, North Carolina.
3. The outcome of the MDL petition will have a significant impact on the schedule Z
of this case and the many others that allege the same facts. For many of the actions that will be
part of the MDL, including this action, the JPML decision will involve a transfer to another
forum. As an initial step to bringing some structure to this welter of lawsuits, Intel has worked
over the past seven weeks to establish a uniform response date to the federal class actions. The
response date requested here, which links Intel’s response to the JPML’s decision, accomplishes
that. To date, 61 of the 68 MDL cases have sought and received extensions of time identical to
the one requested here.2 A similar extension for the Plaintiffs FAC is particularly appropriate
I Many of these complaints also purport to represent a Tennessee consumers and allege
violations of Tennessee laws.
2 Forty—six of these extensions required, and received, approval from the court. In the cases
without an extension in place, either service has not been made or an extension identical to the
one requested here has been or will be requested.
SF/21632144.1 2 .

Case 1:05-cv—OO91/4Q1JF Document 21-8 Filed O1/1,2_{2006 Page 3 of 4
because the Plaintiff’s putative class (Tennessee consumers) and claim (Tennessee Antitrust Act) i
are the subject of at least 34 actions where the extension of time has been entered. i
4. Intel has not sought an extension to a date certain because such an extension is not
practical. Although the Parties subject to the MDL Petition are confident that the JPML will
- decide the Petition expeditiously, the Parties are unable to predict the precise date that the IPML I
will rule. These circumstances make an extension to a date certain could expire before the JPML
ruling, thus nullifying the efficiency and uniformity that the extension contemplates.
5. Finally, because this litigation has just begun, granting the requested extension
l
will not have any negative impact on the schedule of this case. No discovery or motions have
been filed in this case and this is the first extension requested.
For all these reasons, Intel respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion to extend
time to respond to the First Amended Complaint. i
l
Respectfully submitted, }
BURCH, PORTER & JOHNSON,
A Professional Limited Liability Company l
_ f F ibelman (#7677)
Mary Hale (#21878) J
130 North Court Avenue
Memphis, TN 3 8103 l ‘
` Telephone: 901.524.5000
Facsimile: 901.524.5024
j [email protected]
and E
SF:'21632144.1 3

Case 1:05-cv—OO914a.}JF Document 21-8 Filed O1/tz/2006 Page 4 of 4
David M. Balabanian (CA# 37638)
Christopher B. Hockett (CA# 121539)
Joy K. Fuyuno (CA # 123890)
BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP
Three Embarcadero Center
- San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 =
Telephone: 4l5.393.2000
Facsimile: 4l5.393.2286
Richard A. Ripley (DC# 412959) .
BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP =
1120 20th Street, NW, Suite 800 I
Washington, DC 20036 '
Telephone: 202.778.6150 _
Facsimile: 202.778.6155
Attorneys for Defendant
INTEL CORPORATION
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy ofthe foregoing has been served via U.S. T
Mail, postage prepaid, B.], Wade, Esq., Glassman, Ed iaids, Wade & Wyatt, P.C., 26 North I
Second Street, Memphis, Tennessee, 38103, on this Q; day of September, 2005. A
Ie}? eigehnan I i
sF:z1sz2144.1 4