JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING TIME TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, MOTION TO DISMISS BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND PAGE LIMITS, AND STAY OF DISCOVERY

JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.

WHEREAS, on December 12, 2014 the Court granted the joint motion to set a Case Management Conference filed by the indirect purchaser plaintiffs ("Plaintiffs") and defendants Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc., SD-3C, LLC, and SanDisk Corporation (collectively, "Defendants") and set a Case Management Conference for February 6, 2015;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs seek to file a Second Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, in light of the Court's orders in connection with the Case Management

Conference held in the related Samsung action on January 9, 2015, the parties in this action have reached certain agreements that they believe will obviate the need for the Court to hold a Case Management Conference at this time;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO, through their respective counsel, subject to the approval to the Court, that:

1. The Case Management Conference on calendar for February 6, 2015, and the deadline to file a Joint Case Management Statement, should be taken off calendar;

2. Plaintiffs will file their Second Amended Complaint on or before February 3, 2015;

3. By stipulating to the filing of the Second Amended Complaint, Defendants do not consent to any amendment that would expand the legal issues to be resolved by the Court. To the extent Defendants believe any particular amendment is improper, they shall advise Plaintiffs of which portions of the Second Amended Complaint they deem improper, in which case Plaintiffs shall promptly move for leave to amend the complaint in those respects, and Defendants reserve all rights to oppose the amendment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Plaintiffs have advised Defendants that they intend to amend to add a cause(s) of action under Florida law for the alleged Florida subclass, and Defendants do not object in principle that such amendment is improper;

4. Defendants may file a single joint motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint and a consolidated memorandum of points and authorities in support of their joint motion; Plaintiffs may file a single opposition to Defendants' joint motion to dismiss; and Defendants may file a single consolidated reply to Plaintiffs' opposition;

5. Defendants will file their motion to dismiss on or before February 27, 2015;

6. Plaintiffs will file their opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss on or before March 13, 2015;

7. Defendants will file their reply to Plaintiffs' opposition on or before March 20, 2015;

8. Defendants shall have a page limit of thirty-five (35) pages for their consolidated brief in support of their joint motion to dismiss (notwithstanding that the six defendants would be entitled to an aggregate of ninety pages, or fifteen pages each, pursuant to the Court's Civil Standing Orders); Plaintiffs shall have a page limit of thirty-five (35) pages for their brief in opposition; and Defendants shall have a page limit of twenty (20) pages for their consolidated brief in reply;

9. Plaintiffs request that that Defendants' motion to dismiss be set for hearing on March 27, 2015, at 9:00 a.m., the same date and time that the motion to dismiss in the related action, Samsung v. Panasonic Corp., No. 10-cv-3098, is scheduled for hearing. Defendants neither oppose nor join this request. Should the Court deny Plaintiffs' request and strike this paragraph from this Stipulation, Defendants will notice their motion to dismiss for hearing on the first date available in accordance with the N.D. Cal. Civil Local Rules and the Court's Calendar Scheduling Notes; The hearing in the related matter shall be continued to same date as hearing in this matter.

10. The stay of discovery in this case, which has been in effect pursuant to a stipulation among the parties that was So Ordered by the Court on June 28, 2011 and renewed on February 13, 2012, shall remain in effect pending further order of the Court lifting or modifying the stay, or setting a Case Management Conference in the event that the Court denies or denies in part Defendants' motion to dismiss;

11. No party shall serve requests for discovery until the stay has expired;

12. The parties shall not be required to serve initial disclosures, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a), until the stay of discovery has expired;

13. This Stipulation is made without prejudice to any party's right to move to extend the stay of discovery;

14. The parties agree and stipulate that they will confer and propose to the Court a date for the Case Management Conference and associated discovery and ADR obligations after the stay requested herein expires;

15. This Stipulation applies to this proceeding only.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.