In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litig.
In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litig.
258 F.R.D. 280 (D. Del. 2008)
June 4, 2008
Farnan Jr, Joseph J., United States District Judge
Summary
Intel was ordered to produce documents evidencing, referring, or relating to the failure or suspected failure of any Intel custodian to comply with a Litigation Hold Notice or retention instruction. The Special Master concluded that Intel had waived the attorney-client privilege and the work-product protection as to those portions of the Weil summaries that reveal the substance of the custodian statements already voluntarily disclosed in the Paragraph 8 Summaries. Intel was also required to produce any ESI, including harvesting of electronic files on the custodian's computer as well as the custodian's e-mail. The Special Master has concluded that Intel must produce the Weil Materials as redacted by the Special Master.
In re INTEL CORP. MICROPROCESSOR ANTITRUST LITIGATION.
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and AMD International Sales & Services, Ltd., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
Intel Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Intel Kabushki Kaisha, a Japanese Corporation, Defendants
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and AMD International Sales & Services, Ltd., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
Intel Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Intel Kabushki Kaisha, a Japanese Corporation, Defendants
Civil Action Nos. 05–441–JJF, 05–485–JJF.MDL No. 05–1717–JJF
United States District Court, D. Delaware
June 04, 2008
Counsel
Frederick L. Cottrell, III, Chad Michael Shandler, Steven J. Fineman, Richards, Layton & Finger, Adam Balick, Balick & Balick, LLC, Wilmington, DE, Charles P. Diamond, Jennifer E. Laser, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Jed I. Bergman, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiffs.Richard L. Horwitz, W. Harding Drane, Jr., Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE, Kay Kochenderfer, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Anthony Tony L. Marks, Joel W. Nomkin, Perkins Coie, Phoenix, AZ, Darren B. Bernhard, Howrey LLP, Washington, D.C., for Defendants.
Farnan Jr, Joseph J., United States District Judge
ORDER
WHEREAS, the Special Master issued a Report and Recommendation (D.I. 641 in Civ. Act. No. 05–441; D.I. 743 in Civ. Act. No. 05–485; D.I. 903 in MDL No. 05–1717) concerning the Motion of AMD and Class Plaintiffs to compel Intel to produce the notes of Intel's counsel investigation interviews of designated employees conducted by Intel's counsel concerning Intel's compliance with its evidence preservation obligations (“DM 4A”);
WHEREAS, the Special Master also issued sealed Findings and Recommendations Regarding The Declaration Of David J. Lender (D.I. 642 in Civ. Act. No. 05–441; D.I. 744 in Civ. Act. No. 05–485; D.I. 904 in MDL No. 05–1717) in connection with DM 4A;
WHEREAS, objections to the Report and Recommendation were due by May 16, 2008, and none have been filed;
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
- The Special Master's Report and Recommendation concerning DM 4A (D.I. 641 in Civ. Act. No. 05–441; D.I. 743 in Civ. Act. No. 05–485; D.I. 903 in MDL No. 05–1717) is ADOPTED.
- The Special Master's sealed Findings and Recommendations Regarding The Declaration Of David J. Lender (D.I. 642 in Civ. Act. No. 05–441; D.I. 744 in Civ. Act. No. 05–485; D.I. 904 in MDL No. 05–1717) are ADOPTED.