Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

In re Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation, 1917. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20141222815 Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 18, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESOLVING DEFENDANTS CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES, LTD. AND CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD.'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge. WHEREAS, Defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. and Chunghwa Picture Tubes (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. (collectively "CPT") filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction on November 5, 2014 (ECF No. 2960) ("Motion"); WHEREAS, the Court previously ruled on Motions to D
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESOLVING DEFENDANTS CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES, LTD. AND CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD.'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION

SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge.

WHEREAS, Defendants Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd. and Chunghwa Picture Tubes (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. (collectively "CPT") filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction on November 5, 2014 (ECF No. 2960) ("Motion");

WHEREAS, the Court previously ruled on Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, ECF No. 2437 and ECF No. 2611, and found that personal jurisdiction existed over other defendants;

WHEREAS, the Direct Action Plaintiffs (collectively "Plaintiffs") and CPT seek to avoid expending time and the Court's limited resources;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the undersigned counsel on behalf of CPT and Plaintiffs (the "Stipulating Parties"), that:

1. The Court's prior rulings on March 13, 2014 (ECF No. 2437) and June 9, 2014 (ECF No. 2611) apply to CPT's Motion, and CPT's Motion is hereby denied;

2. The Stipulating Parties preserve their right to appeal the denial of CPT's Motion, and all arguments, including arguments regarding whether those prior rulings are correct or incorrect, are preserved for appeal as to CPT's Motion.

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

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