Legal Opinion

In re: Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Antitrust Litigation

District Court, N.D. California

Decided July 8, 2015No. MDL No. 1917; Master Case No. CV-07-5944-SC; Individual Case No. CV-14-2058-SCPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*609 ORDER IN RE CLASS CERTIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO THE THOMSON AND MITSUBISHI DEFENDANTS

SAMUEL CONTI, District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Now before the Court is a motion by the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs (“DPPs”) for Class Certification with respect to the Defendants Thomson and Mitsubishi.1 Thomson *610has settled and stipulated to class certification, pending hearing.2 Accordingly, Mitsubishi is the only remaining Defendant. Mitsubishi opposes the motion.

The motion has been fully briefed,3 and the matter is appropriate for decision without oral argument per Civil Local Rule 7-l(b). As explained below,…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  3. General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Comcast Corp. v. BehrendSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
  5. Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust FundsSupreme Court of the United States · 2013

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Nitsch v. DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API