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

Case 1 :05-cv-00912-JJF Document 13-14 Filed O1/O9/2006 Page 1 of 3
· JUDICIAL PANEL ou 1
_ Mutrnoisrarcr tmoariow
0 5 9 nrt: - 6 2005
Fits Fiire y—······ 'c’
ca.t;n¤<·s Fics
DOCKET N0. 1 717 DEC 28 2w5
°"""'J?§ 612%*%.
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON M ULTIDIST RI C T LI T IG F ryhjggag ,
IN RE INTEL CORP. MICROPROCESSOR ANTITRUSTLITI I _ rg
jj 0 5 -· 2.2Z,&»2. _ L , _ _ _ _A ; l
(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE) _ _ g _ _V P V I
M L 7- L
COND] TI ONAL TRANSFER ORDER (C TO-1) _` _Q _ _ A i
5 I .
On November 8, 2005, the Panel transferred ten civil actions to the United States D.is __ _ K_ ` l
for the District of Delaware for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 if
U.S.C. § 1407. With the consent of that court, all such actions have been assigned to the
Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.
é
It appears that the actions on this conditional transfer order involve questions of fact which are
common to the actions previously transferred to the District of Delaware and assigned to Judge ·
Faman.
Pursuant to Rule 7.4 of the Rules of Procedure of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, ni
199 F.R.D. 425, 435-36 (2001), these actions are transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the
District of Delaware for the reasons stated in the order of November 8, 2005, ___F.Supp.2d___
(J.P.M.L. 2005), and, with the consent of that court, assigned to th Honorable Joseph J. Faman,
Jr.
This order does not become effective until it is tiled in the Office of the Clerk of the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall
be stayed fifteen (15) clays from the entry thereof and if any party tiles a notice of opposition with
the Clerk of the Panel within this fifteen (15) day period, the stay will be continued until further
order of the Panel.
FOR THE PANEL;
inasmuch as no oblection is Michccl Bcck
pcndrnp at this time. thc Clerk of the rmi
stay Is med.
DEC 2 2 2005
CLEFtI<’S OFFICE §
JUDtCIAL PANEL ON \
MULTIDISTFHCT LITIGATION {iq

Case 1 :05-cv-00912-JJF Document 13-14 Filed O1/O9/2006 Page 2 of 3
SCHEDULE CTO-1 - TAG-ALONG ACTIONS
DOCKET NO. 1717
IN RE INTEL CORP. MICROPROCESSOR ANTITRUST LITIGATION
DIST. DIV. C.A. # CASE CAPTION
CALIFORNIA NORTHERN
CAN 3 05-2830 Shanghai I930 Restaurant Partners, L.P. v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2831 Major League Softball, Inc. v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2834 Benjamin Allanoff v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2858 Law Oflices oI'Laure| Stanley, et al. v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2859 °Lazio Family Products v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2882 Ian Walker v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2897 Kevin Stoltz v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2898 Peter Jon Naigo v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2916 Patrick J. Hewson v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-2957 Lawrence Lang v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3028 Trotter-Vogel Realty, Inc. v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3094 Karol Juskiewicz v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3197 Athan Uwakwe v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3271 Jose Juan v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3272 Dressed to Kill Custom Draperies LLC v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3273 Tracy Kinder v. Intel Corp.
CAN 3 05-3277 Edward Rush v. Intel Corp.
CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN
CAS 3 05-1507 Justin Suarez v. Intel Corp.
FLORIDA SOUTHERN
FLS I 05-22262 Nathaniel Schwartz v. Intel Corp.
KANSAS a
Opposed 12/21/05
TENNESSEE EASTERN A
TNE 2 05-212 Andrew Arrnbrister, etal. v. Intel Corp.
TENNESSEE WESTERN
TNW 2 05-2605 Cory Wiles v. Intel Corp.

Case 1 :05-cv-00912-JJF Document 13-14 Filed O1/O9/2006 Page 3 of 3
‘ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
CHAIRMAN: MEMBERS: . DIRECT REPLY TO:
Judge Wm. Terrell I-lodges Judge John F. Keenan ]“dB' R°b°" l·.M'll°" ll'- _
united States Drstr1etCourt United States District Coun U¤**°4 $****95 [?*$¤*°' (:5***** Michael J. Beck
Middle errata arrietaa sattutem Diana arum vm N¤=¤t·=¤· D¤¤=¤== ¤t i¤¤·¤¤¤ Clerk arms Panel
J·=¤¤= ¤- ¤=»~=·t t·e~=·¤ gdwgeggtgt-gggoun 1°?s"§t§§.l?r"tvll.it$lltl?et¥li.t
H23$.i‘1,?t‘b‘t§s[?途5l°é£?t%'.lttt ¤l?¤t== ¤·‘··<-=l-L i£§$§l“r2£‘%’,"ll2§t rats,
mage 1. Frederick Matz ·l¤¢z•= ¤¤ri4 R- H¤¤¤¤¤ w°5l""gl°"‘ D`C` mm
`¤%‘·?t%‘·¥·S¤'t¥·’»£’it’~‘1?‘°°““ El=ii°¤°l htlpat.twww.jpml.useouns.g¤v
December 22, 2005
Peter T. Dalleo, Clerk
J. Caleb Boggs Federal Bldg.
Lockbox 13
844 North King Street
Wilmington, DE l980l-3570
Re: MDL- I 71 7 -- In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litigation
(See Attached CTO-I)
Dear Mr. Dalleoz
I am enclosing a certified copy and one additional copy of a conditional transfer order filed by the Panel
in the above-captioned matter on December 6, 2005. As stipulated in Rule 7.4(a) ofthe Rules of Procedure of the
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, I99 F.R.D. 425, 435-36 (2001), transmittal of the order has been stayed
15 days to give any party an opportunity to oppose the transfer. The 15-day period has now elapsed, no opposition
was received, and the order is directed to you for filing.
The Panel's goveming statute, 28 U.S .C. § 1407, requires that the transferee clerk "...transmit aeertiiied copy
of the Panel's order to transfer to the clerk ofthe district court from which the action is being transferred."
A list of involved counsel is attached.
Very truly,
Michael J. Beck
Clerk of the Panel
Olin
Deputy Clerk
Attachment
ee: Transferee Judge: Judge Joseph J. Faman, Jr.
Transferor Judge: (See Attached List of Judges)
Transferor Clerk: (See Attached List of Clerks)
JPML Form 36