Legal Opinion
In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
District Court, N.D. California
Decided March 28, 2010No. M 07-1827 SI; MDL No. 1827PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION; DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE MODIFIED CLASS DEFINITIONS; GRANTING MOTIONS TO STRIKE UNTIMELY DECLARATIONS
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
Now before the Court is the indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, defendants’ motion to strike the modified class definitions and declarations filed with the reply brief, and plaintiffs’ objections to the declaration of Shane Gregorczyk. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for class…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- In re Vitamin C Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2012
- In Re RAIL FREIGHT FUEL SURCHARGE ANTITRUST LITIGATIONDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Pena v. Taylor Farms Pacific, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2015
- Nitsch v. DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
- In re Animation Workers Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.