Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 1255 (N.D.Cal. Jul. 10, 2012)
Sharp Corporation ("Sharp") is a putative member of the Direct Purchaser Plaintiff ("DPP") class in the instant case ("MDL"), and also is a plaintiff in substantially similar litigation before the courts of Korea.
That statute provides, in pertinent part, that "[t]he district court of the district in which a person resides or is found may order him to ... produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal ...
The Clerk of the Court classified Sharp's ex parte application as a separate, miscellaneous case and assigned it case number 12- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 For the Northern District of California United States District Court MC-80151 ("Misc.
Now that the Miscellaneous Case is related to the MDL, Sharp's request falls squarely within the purview of the Special Master.
1 The list of parties comprising the CRT Defendant group, found at pages 2 through 6 of their Objection, is incorporated herein.
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 1255 (N.D.Cal. Jul. 10, 2012)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 5438 (N.D.Cal. Apr. 10, 2019)
OPPOSITION TO IRICO DEFENDANTS’ AMENDED MOTIONS TO DISMISS; Master File No. 07-CV-5944-JST Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (“IPPs”) and Defendants Irico Group Corporation and Irico Display Devices Co., Ltd. (together, the “Irico Defendants” or “Irico”), by and through the undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, on March 19, 2019, the Irico Defendants filed Irico Group Corporation’s Amended Motion to Dismiss Claims of Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(1)), ECF No. 5409, and Irico Display Devices Co., Ltd.’s Amended Motion to Dismiss Claims of Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(1)), ECF No. 5411; WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulation and order entered by the Court on January 30, 2019, IPPs’ oppositions to Irico’s amended motions to dismiss shall be due on or before April 12, 2019, ECF No. 5381; WHEREAS, under Civil Local Rule 7-4(b), “[u]nless the Court expressly orders otherwise pursuant to a party’s request made prior to the due date, briefs or memoranda filed with opposition papers may not exceed 25 pages of text”; WHEREAS, IPPs wish to file a single opposition brief not to exceed 40 pages of text; WHEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel
IPPs may file a single opposition brief not to exceed 40 pages of text; and The Irico Defendants may file a single reply brief not to exceed 30 pages of text.
Attorneys for Defendants Irico Group Corp. and Irico Display Devices Co., Ltd. By: ___________________________ Jon S. Tigar United States District Judge
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 5438 (N.D.Cal. Apr. 10, 2019)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 3133 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 20, 2014)
The Decision found the existence of two highly organized cartels comprised of, generally speaking, the same defendants here, which were aware of the illegality of their activities and ultimately successful in imposing price increases on consumers in the CRT and CPT industries.
In support of the motion, DAPs argue that because discovery has now closed and the trial date is rapidly approaching, the balance between comity and the importance of the Decision to this litigation has so shifted as to now justify production.
Furthermore, as the Court previously found, the importance of the EC's leniency program, and cooperation between the EC and United States law enforcement agencies including the Department of Justice, also militate against disclosure.
Second, and relatedly, having reviewed the DG Competition's letter, the Court sees no reason to short-circuit the EC's publication process when the EC appears confident that at least a provisional version of the Decision may be published in approximately one month.
"), sent by the DG Competition was intended "to draw your attention to the fact that any such disclosure of [the Decision on a motion to compel] would be made in contravention of Commission rules and state policy on this issue."
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 3133 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 20, 2014)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4163 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 2, 2015)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4163 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 2, 2015)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 2010 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 15, 2013)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 2010 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 15, 2013)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 5212 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 2, 2017)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 5212 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 2, 2017)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 2936 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 22, 2014)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 2936 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 22, 2014)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4979 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 25, 2016)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4979 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 25, 2016)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4456 (N.D.Cal. Mar. 4, 2016)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4456 (N.D.Cal. Mar. 4, 2016)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 2937 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 22, 2014)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 2937 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 22, 2014)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 1917 (N.D.Cal. Sep. 10, 2013)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 1917 (N.D.Cal. Sep. 10, 2013)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4964 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 14, 2016)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4964 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 14, 2016)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4084 (N.D.Cal. Sep. 30, 2015)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 4084 (N.D.Cal. Sep. 30, 2015)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 3899 (N.D.Cal. Jul. 2, 2015)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 3899 (N.D.Cal. Jul. 2, 2015)
+ More Snippets
Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 3398 (N.D.Cal. Jan. 16, 2015)
Cite Document
MDL No. 1917 In Re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 3:07-cv-05944, No. 3398 (N.D.Cal. Jan. 16, 2015)
+ More Snippets