Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 1917. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160824936 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 22, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT LG ELECTRONICS, INC.'S MOTION FOR BIFURCATION AND BENCH TRIAL JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Kmart Corporation ("Plaintiffs") are the only remaining Plaintiffs in Case No. 11-cv-05514 (" Sears/Kmart case"); WHEREAS, LG Electronics, Inc. ("LGE") is the only remaining Defendant in the Sears/Kmart case; WHEREAS, LGE filed its motion for bifurcation a
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANT LG ELECTRONICS, INC.'S MOTION FOR BIFURCATION AND BENCH TRIAL

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Kmart Corporation ("Plaintiffs") are the only remaining Plaintiffs in Case No. 11-cv-05514 ("Sears/Kmart case");

WHEREAS, LG Electronics, Inc. ("LGE") is the only remaining Defendant in the Sears/Kmart case;

WHEREAS, LGE filed its motion for bifurcation and bench trial in the Sears/Kmart case on August 12, 2016 (ECF No. 4759), pursuant to this Court's order issued at ECF No. 4623;

WHEREAS, that motion is currently noticed for a September 22, 2016 hearing;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and LGE are already scheduled to appear before this Court on September 20, 2016 for a status conference at 2:00pm, see ECF No. 4689; PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7-12, PLAINTIFFS AND LGE, BY AND THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD, HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:

1. The parties agree to the following briefing deadlines for LGE's motion for bench trial and bifurcation (ECF No. 4759), if convenient for the Court: August 30, 2016 for Sears/Kmart's opposition brief; and September 8, 2016 for LGE's reply brief.

2. If convenient to the Court, the parties agree to move the hearing on LGE's motion for bifurcation and bench trial (ECF No. 4759) to the September 20, 2016 status conference.

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i), the filer attests that the concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the above signatories.

It is so stipulated and agreed to by the parties.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer