Target Corp. v. Technicolor SA et al, No. 3:2013cv05686 - Document 32 (N.D. Cal. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER granting 30 STIPULATION Dismissing Claims Under State Law with Prejudice. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 11/24/2014. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2014)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Target Corp. v. Technicolor SA et al 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Doc. 32 Jason C. Murray (CA Bar No. 169806) Robert B. McNary (CA Bar No. 253745) CROWELL & MORING LLP 515 South Flower St., 40th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: 213-443-5582 Facsimile: 213-622-2690 Email: jmurray@crowell.com rmcnary@crowell.com Jerome A. Murphy (pro hac vice) Matthew J. McBurney (pro hac vice) Astor H.L. Heaven (pro hac vice) CROWELL & MORING LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 Telephone: 202-624-2500 Facsimile: 202-628-5116 Email: jmurphy@crowell.com mmcburney@crowell.com aheaven@crowell.com 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff Target Corporation 13 14 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 16 17 IN RE: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION 18 Master File No. 3:07-cv-05944-SC 19 20 21 22 23 This Document Relates to: Target Corp. v. Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-05514-SC Target Corp., et al. v. Technicolor SA, et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-05686-SC MDL No. 1917 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW Judge: Hon. Samuel Conti 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff Target 2 Corporation (“Plaintiff”), and defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd., Chunghwa Picture 3 Tubes (Malaysia), Irico Group Corporation, Irico Group Electronics Co., Ltd., Irico Display 4 Devices Co., Ltd., LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics USA, Inc., LP Displays International 5 Ltd., Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Displays, Ltd., Hitachi America, Ltd., Hitachi Asia, Ltd., Hitachi 6 Electronic Devices (USA), Inc., Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North 7 America, MT Picture Display Co., Ltd., Beijing Matsushita Color CRT Co., Ltd., Koninklijke 8 Philips Electronics N.V., Philips Electronics North America Corporation, Philips Electronics 9 Industries (Taiwan), Ltd., Philips da Amazonia Industria Electronica Ltda., Samsung SDI Co., 10 Ltd., Samsung SDI America, Inc., Samsung SDI Mexico S.A. de C.V., Samsung SDI Brasil 11 Ltda., Shenzhen Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Tianjin Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI 12 (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd., Samtel Color Ltd., Thai CRT Co., Ltd., Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba 13 America, Inc., Toshiba America Consumer Products, LLC, Toshiba America Electronic 14 Components, Inc., Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., Technicolor SA (f/k/a Thomson 15 SA); Technicolor USA, Inc. (f/k/a Thomson Consumer Electronics, Inc.), Videocon Industries, 16 Ltd., Technologies Displays Americas LLC (f/k/a Thomson Displays Americas LLC), 17 Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Mitsubishi Electric Visual Solutions America, Inc., and 18 Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., being all the defendants in this case (collectively, 19 “Defendants”) state as follow: 20 On October 3, 2013, Target Corporation filed its Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) in 21 individual case number 3:11-cv-05514-SC (MDL Master Dkt. No. 1981). On December 9, 2013, 22 Target filed its Complaint in individual case number 3:13-cv-05686-SC (Ind. Case Dkt. No. 1) 23 (the “Thomson/Mitsubishi/TDA Complaint”). 24 Complaint are the “Complaints.” In the Complaints, Target asserts claims for relief against 25 Defendants under the Sherman Act, the California Cartwright Act, California’s Unfair 26 Competition Law, California Business and Professional Code §17200, et seq., Arizona Revised 27 Stat. § 44-1401, et seq., Florida Stat. §501.201, et seq., Illinois Antitrust Act, 740 Illinois Code 28 The SAC and the Thomson/Mitsubishi/TDA STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 2 1 10/1, et seq., Iowa Code §§ 553.1, et. seq., Kansas Stat. Ann. §§ 50-101, et. seq., Michigan 2 Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 445.771, et seq., Minnesota Stat. §§ 325D.50, et seq., New York General 3 Business Law §§ 340, et seq., North Carolina Gen. Stat. §§ 75-1, et seq., and Wisconsin Stat. §§ 4 133.01, et seq. 5 Plaintiff now desires to dismiss with prejudice its claims against Defendants under the 6 California Cartwright Act, California’s Unfair Competition Law, California Business and 7 Professional Code §17200, et seq., Arizona Revised Stat. § 44-1401, et seq., Florida Stat. 8 §501.201, et seq., Illinois Antitrust Act, 740 Illinois Code 10/1, et seq., Iowa Code §§ 553.1, et. 9 seq., Kansas Stat. Ann. §§ 50-101, et. seq., Michigan Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 445.771, et seq., 10 Minnesota Stat. §§ 325D.50, et seq., New York General Business Law §§ 340, et seq., North 11 Carolina Gen. Stat. §§ 75-1, et seq., and Wisconsin Stat. §§ 133.01, et seq. Plaintiff is not 12 dismissing, and will continue to prosecute, its claims against Defendants under the Sherman Act. 13 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE that the claims of 14 Plaintiff asserted against Defendants in these cases under the California Cartwright Act, 15 California’s Unfair Competition Law, California Business and Professional Code §17200, et 16 seq., Arizona Revised Stat. § 44-1401, et seq., Florida Stat. §501.201, et seq., Illinois Antitrust 17 Act, 740 Illinois Code 10/1, et seq., Iowa Code §§ 553.1, et. seq., Kansas Stat. Ann. §§ 50-101, 18 et. seq., Michigan Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 445.771, et seq., Minnesota Stat. §§ 325D.50, et seq., 19 New York General Business Law §§ 340, et seq., North Carolina Gen. Stat. §§ 75-1, et seq., and 20 Wisconsin Stat. §§ 133.01, et seq. are dismissed with prejudice. Both Plaintiff and Defendants 21 agree to bear their own costs and fees with respect to the dismissed claims. This dismissal does 22 not apply to the claims of Plaintiff asserted against Defendants in these cases under the Sherman 23 Act. 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 3 1 Dated: November 5, 2014 /s/ Jason C. Murray Jason C. Murray (CA Bar No. 169806) Robert B. McNary (CA Bar No. 253745) CROWELL & MORING LLP 515 South Flower St., 40th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: 213-443-5582 Facsimile: 213-622-2690 Email: jmurray@crowell.com rmcnary@crowell.com 2 3 4 5 6 Jerome A. Murphy (pro hac vice) Matthew J. McBurney (pro hac vice) Astor H.L. Heaven (pro hac vice) CROWELL & MORING LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 Telephone: 202-624-2500 Facsimile: 202-628-5116 Email: jmurphy@crowell.com mmcburney@crowell.com aheaven@crowell.com 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Attorney for Plaintiff Target Corporation 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 4 1 2 /s/ Joel Steven Sanders Joel Steven Sanders jsanders@gibsondunn.com Rachel S. Brass rbrass@gibsondunn.com Christine A. Fujita cfujita@gibsondunn.com GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 555 Mission Street Suite 3000 San Francisco, CA 94105-2933 Tel: 415-393-8200 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Counsel for Defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. and Chunghwa Picture Tubes (Malaysia) 10 11 12 /s/ Jeffrey L. Kessler Jeffrey L. Kessler jkessler@winston.com A. Paul Victor pvictor@winston.com Eva W. Cole ewcole@winston.com Molly M. Donovan mmdonovan@winston.com WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166-4193 Tel: (212) 294-6700 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 David L. Yohai david.yohai@weil.com Steven A. Reiss steven.reiss@weil.com Adam C. Hemlock adam.hemlock@weil.com WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10153 Tel: (212) 310-8000 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 5 Counsel for Defendants Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, and MT Picture Display Co., Ltd. 1 2 3 4 /s/ Hojoon Hwang Hojoon Hwang hojoon.hwang@mto.com MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 560 Mission Street, 27th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel: (415) 512-4000 5 6 7 8 9 William D. Temko william.temko@mto.com Jonathan E. Altman jonathan.altman@mto.com Bethany W. Kristovich bethany.kristovich@mto.com MUNGER TOLLES & OLSON LLP 355 South Grand Avenue, 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560 Tel. (213) 683-9100 10 11 12 13 14 15 Counsel for Defendants LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics USA, Inc. 16 17 18 /s/ Mark C. Dosker Mark C. Dosker mark.dosker@squiresanders.com Nathan Lane, III nathan.lane@squiresanders.com SQUIRE SANDERS LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 954-0200 19 20 21 22 23 Counsel for Defendant Technologies Displays Americas LLC and Videocon Industries, Ltd. 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 6 1 /s/ John Taladay John Taladay john.taladay@bakerbotts.com Joseph Ostoyich joseph.ostoyich@bakerbotts.com Charles M. Malaise Charles.malaise@bakerbotts.com Erik T. Koons erik.koons@bakerbotts.com BAKER BOTTS LLP The Warner 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004-2400 Tel: (202) 639-7909 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Jon V. Swenson jon.swenson@bakerbotts.com BAKER BOTTS LLP 1001 Page Mill Road Building One, Suite 200 Palo Alto, CA 94304 Tel. (650) 739-7500 11 12 13 14 Counsel for Defendants Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V., Philips Electronics North America Corporation, Philips Electronics Industries (Taiwan), Ltd., and Philips da Amazonia Industria Electronica Ltda. 15 16 17 18 19 /s/ Richard Snyder Christine Laciak christine.laciak@freshfields.com Richard Snyder richard.snyder@freshfields.com Craig D. Minerva craig.minerva@freshfields.com Bruce C. McCulloch bruce.mcculloch@freshfields.com Terry Calvani terry.calvani@freshfields.com FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS & DERINGER US, LLP 700 13th Street, NW, 10th Floor 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 7 Washington, DC 20005-3960 Tel: (202) 777-4500 1 2 Counsel for Defendant Beijing Matsushita Color CRT Co., Ltd. 3 4 5 /s/ Lucius B. Lau Christopher M. Curran ccurran@whitecase.com Lucius B. Lau alau@whitecase.com Dana E. Foster defoster@whitecase.com WHITE & CASE, LLP 701 13th Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 Tel: (202) 626-3600 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Counsel for Defendants Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba America, Inc., Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., Toshiba America Consumer Products, L.L.C., and Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc. 13 14 15 16 /s/ Eliot A. Adelson Eliot A. Adelson eadelson@kirkland.com James Maxwell Cooper max.cooper@kirkland.com KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 555 California Street, 27th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 439-1400 Facsimile: (415) 439-1500 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 James H. Mutchnik jmutchnik@kirkland.com Kate Wheaton kate.wheaton@kirkland.com KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 300 North LaSalle Chicago, Illinois 60654 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 8 Telephone: (312) 862-2000 Facsimile: (312) 862-2200 Counsel for Defendants Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Displays, Ltd., Hitachi Asia, Ltd., Hitachi America, Ltd., and Hitachi Electronic Devices (USA), Inc., 1 2 3 4 5 /s/ James L. McGinnis Gary L. Halling ghalling@sheppardmullin.com James L. McGinnis jmcginnis@sheppardmullin.com Michael Scarborough mscarborough@sheppardmullin.com SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 434-9100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Counsel for Defendants Samsung SDI America, Inc., Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Samsung SDI Mexico S.A. de C.V., Samsung SDI Brasil Ltda., Shenzhen Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., Tianjin Samsung SDI Co., Ltd., and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. 13 14 15 16 17 /s/ Terrence J. Truax Brent Caslin bcaslin@jenner.com JENNER & BLOCK LLP 633 West 5th Street, Suite 3600 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2054 Tel: (213) 239-5100 18 19 20 21 22 Terrence J. Truax ttruax@jenner.com Michael T. Brody mbrody@jenner.com Shaun M. Van Horn svanhorn@jenner.com Gabriel A. Fuentes gfuentes@jenner.com Molly M. Powers 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 9 mpowers@jenner.com JENNER & BLOCK LLP 353 North Clark Street Chicago, IL 60654 Tel: (312) 222-9350 1 2 3 4 Counsel for Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. and Mitsubishi Electric Visual Solutions America, Inc. 5 6 7 /s/ Kathy Osborn Calvin L. Litsey calvin.litsey@faegrebd.com FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 1950 University Avenue, Suite 450 East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2279 Tel: (650) 324-6700 8 9 10 11 12 Kathy Osborn kathy.osborn@faegrebd.com Ryan M. Hurley ryan.hurley@faegrebd.com FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 300 N. Meridian Street, Suite 2700 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Tel: (317) 237-0300 13 14 15 16 17 Jeffrey S. Roberts Jeff.roberts@faegrebd.com FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 3200 Wells Fargo 1700 Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Tel: (303) 607-3500 18 19 20 21 22 Stephen M. Judge Steve.judge@faegrebd.com FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP 202 S. Michigan Street, Suite 1400 South Bend, IN 46601 Tel: (574) 234-4149 23 24 25 26 Counsel for Defendants Technicolor SA and Technicolor USA, Inc. 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 10 1 2 Pursuant to General Order No. 45, § X-B, the filer asserts that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the above signatories. 3 By: /s/Jason C. Murray Jason C. Murray IT IS SO ORDERED. S UNIT ED 11/24/2014 Dated: _________________________ NO 9 nti muel Co RT 10 a Judge S 11 H ER 12 N D IS T IC T R 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS UNDER STATE LAW MDL NO. 1917 11 R NIA Hon. Samuel Conti United States District Judge 8 FO 7 RT U O 6 S DISTRICT TE C TA LI 5 Dated: November 5, 2014 A 4 OF C
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
