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

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
MARCIA WEINGARTEN AND TOM CLARK, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated in New Mexico, Plaintiffs, vs. AU OPTRONICS CORP.; AU OPTRONICS CORP. AMERICA; CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CO., LTD.; CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS USA, INC.; CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES, LTD.; FUJITSU LIMITED, INC.; FUJITSU AMERICA, INC.; HANNSTAR DISPLAY CORPORATION; HITACHI, LTD.; HITACHI DISPLAYS, LTD.; HITACHI AMERICA, LTD.; IDTECH CO., LTD.; IDTECH USA, INC.; IPS ALPHA TECHNOLOGY, LTD.; LG.PHILIPS LCD CO., LTD.; LG.PHILIPS LCD AMERICA, INC.; MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD.; PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA; MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION; MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC & ELECTRONICS USA, INC.; NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; NEC LCD TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD.; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; SANYO ELECTRIC CO. LTD.; SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION; EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION; SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION; EPSON AMERICA, INC.; EPSON ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.; SHARP CORPORATION; SHARP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION; S-LCD CORPORATION; SYNTAX-BRILLIAN CORP.; TOSHIBA CORPORATION; TOSHIBA AMERICA, INC., TOSHIBA MATSUSHITA DISPLAY TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., and JOHN DOES 1-100, Defendants. Case No. 07-CV-00218 MCA/WDS

JOINT MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

JOINT MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

1

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 2 of 7

Plaintiffs Marcia Weingarten and Tom Clark and Defendants AU Optronics Corporation America; Chi Mei Optoelectronics U.S.A., Inc.; Epson America, Inc.; Epson Electronics America, Inc.; Hitachi America, Ltd.; LG.Philips LCD America, Inc.; Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.; NEC Electronics America, Inc.; Panasonic Corporation of North America; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; SANYO North America Corporation; and Sharp Electronics Corporation (the "Moving Defendants") through their respective attorneys, jointly submit for the Court's approval the following Stipulation for Extension of Time:

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint in the above-captioned case on or about March 21, 2007;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs allege antitrust violations by manufacturers of Liquid Crystal Display ("LCD") products;

WHEREAS more than one hundred and twenty complaints have been filed to date in federal district courts throughout the United States by plaintiffs purporting to bring class actions on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers alleging antitrust violations by manufacturers of LCD products (collectively, " the LCD Cases");

WHEREAS there is a motion pending before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to transfer the LCD Cases for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs anticipate the possibility of Consolidated Amended Complaints in the LCD Cases;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs and the Moving Defendants have agreed that an orderly schedule for any response to the pleadings in the LCD Cases would be more efficient for the parties and for the Court;

2

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 3 of 7

WHEREAS Plaintiffs agree that the deadline for the Moving Defendants to respond to the First Amended Complaint shall be extended until the earliest of the following dates: (1) forty-five days after the filing of a Consolidated Amended Complaint in the LCD Cases; (2) forty-five days after Plaintiffs provide a written notice to the Moving Defendants that they do not intend to file a Consolidated Amended Complaint, provided that such notice may be given only after the initial case management conference in the MDL transferee court in this case; or (3) as ordered by the MDL transferee court;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs and the Moving Defendants agree that notwithstanding the above paragraphs, should any defendant to whom this extension applies, except pursuant to Court Order, respond to any complaint in another LCD Case prior to the date contemplated by this Stipulation, then such defendant shall make a simultaneous response to the First Amended Complaint in the above-captioned matter;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs further agree that this extension is available, without further stipulation with counsel for Plaintiffs, to all named defendants who notify Plaintiffs in writing of their intention to join this extension and who file a motion with the Court seeking such extension on the same terms as set forth in this motion;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs, the Moving Defendants, and any other named defendants who subsequently file a motion to obtain the benefit of this extension pursuant to the preceding paragraph agree that such defendant shall not contest the sufficiency of process or service of process. This Stipulation does not constitute a waiver of any other defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction or improper venue.

PLAINTIFFS AND THE MOVING DEFENDANTS, BY AND THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:

3

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 4 of 7

1.

The deadline for the Moving Defendants to respond to the First Amended Complaint shall be extended until the earliest of the following dates: (1) forty-five days after the filing of a Consolidated Amended Complaint in the LCD Cases; (2) forty-five days after Plaintiffs provide a written notice to the Moving Defendants that they do not intend to file a Consolidated Amended Complaint, provided that such notice may be given only after the initial case management conference in the MDL transferee court in this case; or (3) as ordered by the MDL transferee court.

2.

This extension is available, without further stipulation with counsel for Plaintiffs, to all named defendants who notify Plaintiffs in writing of their intention to join this extension and who file a motion with the Court seeking such extension on the same terms as set forth in this motion.

3.

Plaintiffs, the Moving Defendants, and any other named defendants that provide notice of their intention to join this extension pursuant to the preceding paragraph agree that such defendant shall not contest the sufficiency of process or service of process. This Stipulation does not constitute a waiver of any other defense, including but not limited to the defenses of lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction or improper venue.

4.

Plaintiffs, the Moving Defendants, and any other named defendants joining this extension pursuant to paragraph 2 agree that notwithstanding the above paragraphs, should any defendant to whom this extension applies, except pursuant to Court Order, respond to any complaint in another LCD Case prior to the date contemplated by this Stipulation, then such defendant shall make a simultaneous response to the First Amended Complaint in the above-captioned matter.

IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated this 30 day of March, 2007.

4

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 5 of 7

FREEDMAN, BOYD, DANIELS, HOLLANDER, GOLDBERG & IVES, P.A. By:____telephonically approved________ David A. Freedman 20 First Plaza NW, Suite 700 Post Office Box 25326 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87125-0326 (505) 842-9960 Attorneys for Plaintiffs SHEEHAN, SHEEHAN & STELZNER, P.A. By:______telephonically approved_____ Luis G. Stelzner 707 Broadway NE, Suite 300 Post Office Box 271 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 (505) 247-0411 Attorneys for Defendant LG.Philips LCD America, Inc. MODRALL, SPERLING, ROEHL, HARRIS & SISK, P.A. By: s/Zachary McCormick John R. Cooney Zachary L. McCormick Attorneys for AU Optronics Corporation America; Chi Mei Optoelectronics U.S.A., Inc.; Epson America, Inc.; Epson Electronics America, Inc.; Hitachi America, Ltd.; Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.; NEC Electronics America, Inc.; Panasonic Corporation of North America; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; SANYO North America Corporation; and Sharp Electronics Corporation Post Office Box 2168 Bank of America Centre 500 Fourth Street NW, Suite 1000 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103-2168 Telephone: 505.848.1800

5

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 6 of 7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 30th day of March, 2007, we filed the foregoing electronically through the CM/ECF system, which caused the following parties or counsel to be served by electronic means, as more fully reflected on the Notice of Electronic Filing: David A. Freedman [email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected] Matthew L. Garcia [email protected],[email protected] Kevin J O'Connor [email protected] AND WE FURTHER CERTIFY that on such date a copy of the foregoing was served via first-class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows to: Timothy D Battin Straus & Boies LLP 4041 University Drive 5th Floor Fairfax, VA 22030 David Boies, III Straus & Boies LLP 4041 University Drive 5th Floor Fairfax, VA 22030 Nathan Cihlar Straus & Boies LLP 4041 University Drive 5th Floor Fairfax, VA 22030 Ian Otto Straus & Boies LLP 4041 University Drive 5th Floor Fairfax, VA 22030

6

Case 3:07-cv-04931-SI

Document 1-9

Filed 09/24/2007

Page 7 of 7

MODRALL SPERLING ROEHL HARRIS & SISK, P.A.

By

/s/ Zachary L. McCormick Zachary L. McCormick

7