Case 1:05-md-01720-MKB-VMS Document 8434 Filed 04/26/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 141735
`Case 1:05-md-Ol720-MKB-VMS Document 8434 Filed 04/26/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 141735
`
`Arnold Porter +1Robert.Mason@amoldporter.com
`
`Robert Mason
`
`April 26, 2021
`
`BY ECF
`
`The Honorable Margo K. Brodie
`The Honorable Vera M. Scanlon
`
`United States District Court
`
`for the Eastern District of New York
`
`225 Cadman Plaza East
`
`Brooklyn, NY 11201
`
`Re:
`
`In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount
`Antitrust Litigation, No. 05-md-01720 1E.D.N.Y.) (MKB) (VMSQ
`
`Dear Judges Brodie and Scanlon:
`
`We write on behalf of defendants to seek leave to file a single reply memorandum
`of up to 25 pages regarding the Rule 23 (b)(2) plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in
`Barry ’s Cut Rate Stores Inc., et al. v. Visa, Inc., et al., No. 05-md—01720 (MKB) (VMS).
`Reply briefs on the motion for class certification and related motions to intervene are due
`April 30, 2021, with the motion papers to be filed with the Court by May 4, 2021. See
`04/06/2021 Order.
`
`Defendants’ reply memorandum would address the opposition arguments about
`permitting opt-outs and excluding future merchants from the proposed Rule 23 (b)(2)
`class, which are made in the four separate memoranda — totaling ninety pages — that
`were served in opposition to class certification. Specifically, defendants’ reply would
`address the two opposition briefs that were filed by plaintiffs in the individual 7-Eleven,
`Target, and Home Depot actions, and plaintiffs in the individual Grubhub action. For
`efficiency, defendants’ reply also would address the two opposition briefs served by the
`proposed intervenors, Walmart and the Retail Industry Leaders Association and National
`Retail Federation. Defendants respectfully submit that the significance of the issues
`raised, and the efficiency of filing a single reply memorandum instead of separate reply
`memoranda, warrant allowing defendants to join in filing a single reply memorandum of
`up to 25 pages. Defendants will of course endeavor to present all issues as efficiently as
`possible and may not use the full number of pages requested.
`
`None of the opponents of class certification object to this request as long as
`defendants do not object to the opponents seeking to respond to defendants’ reply
`memorandum in sur-reply memoranda.
`
`I Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
`
`250 West 55th Street I New York, NY 10019-9710 I www.arnoldporter.com
`
`

`

`Case 1:05-md-01720-MKB-VMS Document 8434 Filed 04/26/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 141736
`Case 1:05-md-Ol720-MKB-VMS Document 8434 Filed 04/26/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 141736
`
`Arnold Porter
`
`April 26, 2021
`Page 2
`
`Counsel for plaintiffs in the individual 7-Eleven, Target, and Home Depot actions,
`and in the individual Grubhub action, stated that they consent to the request on the
`condition that defendants do not object to their filing a joint response to defendants’ reply
`memorandum of up to 15 pages.
`
`Counsel for Walmart similarly stated that they do not object to defendants’
`request, provided that defendants would not object to Walmart’s submission of a
`response of up to 10 pages.
`
`Counsel for the Retail Industry Leaders Association and National Retail
`Federation likewise stated that they consent to defendants’ request if defendants consent
`to their responding in a submission of 15 pages or less.
`
`Defendants do not object to any of these proposed filings if the Court believes that
`sur-replies are warranted.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/S/ Robert C. Mason
`
`Robert C. Mason
`
`Counselfor Visa
`
`cc: All Counsel of Record via ECF
`
`