Examples of Automotive Wire Harness Systems in a sentence
Automotive Wire Harness Systems Settlement Class: All automobile dealers that, from July 1, 1998, through the Execution Date, purchased a new vehicle in the United States that included one or more Automotive Wire Harness Systems as a component part, or indirectly purchased one or more Automotive Wire Harness Systems as a replacement part, which were manufactured or sold by a Defendant, any current or former subsidiary of a Defendant, or any co-conspirator of a Defendant.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 23(g), Class Counsel, previously appointed by the Court (Cotchett, Pitre, & McCarthy LLP, Robins Kaplan LLP, and Susman Godfrey L.L.P.), are appointed as Counsel for the Automotive Wire Harness Systems Settlement Class (“Settlement Class”).
To the extent permitted and/or authorized by law, sales of Automotive Wire Harness Systems by the Released Parties in or into the United States shall remain in the Actions against the non-settling Defendants and/or any future defendants other than the Released Parties as a basis for damage claims, and shall be part of any joint and several liability claims in the Actions against the non-settling Defendants and/or any future defendants or persons or entities other than the Released Parties.
Without the vehicles, the Automotive Wire Harness Systems have little to no value because they have no independent utility.
Essentially, Automotive Wire Harness Systems serve as the “central nervous system” of a motor vehicle.
The additional component part cases were transferred to this Court for coordinated pretrial proceedings, and In re: Automotive Wire Harness Systems Antitrust Litigation was renamed “In re: Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation.” (Doc.
A copy of the Distribution Protocol is available at www.autopartsettlement.ca.The Distribution Protocol is designed to compensate purchasers of automotive vehicles containing Automotive Wire Harness Systems in a manner that best reflects the anticipated impact of the alleged price-fixing.
Defendant Lear – directly and/or through its subsidiaries, which it wholly owned and/or controlled – manufactured, marketed and/or sold Automotive Wire Harness Systems that were purchased throughout the United States, including in this district, during the Class Period.
Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Subaru and General Motors were unaware of alleged price-fixing in respect of the Automotive Wire Harness Systems they purchased for installation in their automotive vehicles.Class action lawsuits have been commenced in Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec alleging that automotive part manufacturers conspired to fix prices of Automotive Wire Harness Systems (collectively, the “Automotive Wire Harness Systems Proceedings”).
No wrongdoing is alleged as against these companies and they were not involved in the Canadian Automotive Wire Harness Systems class action.