Hightower

Hightower v. Celestron Acquisition, LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 2, 20205:20-cv-03639California973 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

13 IN RE TELESCOPES ANTITRUST Case No. 5:20-cv-03639-EJD 14 LITIGATION Case No. 5:20-cv-03642-EJD

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ORDER GRANTING DIRECT AND

INDIRECT PURCHASER

17 All Actions PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ORDER AUTHORIZING ALTERNATIVE

SERVICE

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Before the Court is Direct and Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs’ (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Order Authorizing Alternative Service. Dkt. No. 99 (“Motion”). Having considered all the papers and pleadings on file, the Court had determined that the matter is suitable for decision without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). Defendants Celestron Acquisition, LLC, SW Technology Corp, Corey Lee, David Anderson, and Joseph Lupica oppose the Motion on the grounds that Plaintiffs have made no effort to effectuate service through the Hague Convention or letters rogatory and have therefore failed to show that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.