News
 

Bookmark and Share

(2) 

The  U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has halted the patent infringement case filed by Rambus against Micron Technology. The stay order, issued by the Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, comes after an earlier decision by the U.S. District Court of Delaware that Rambus’ patents in that case were unenforceable against Micron.

“We are pleased that Judge Whyte recognized that the Delaware Court’s unenforceability ruling impacts the patents asserted by Rambus in the California matter, and that he stayed Rambus’ patent case against Micron. We believe that Judge Robinson’s thorough decision will be upheld on appeal,” said Rod Lewis, Micron’s vice president of legal affairs and general counsel.

Judge Whyte likewise stayed proceedings in parallel patent infringement cases filed by Rambus against Samsung Electronics, Nanya Technology Corp. and Hynix Semiconductor. Therefore, Rambus can still demand licensing fees from the aforementioned companies.

On January 9, the Honorable Sue L. Robinson of the U.S. District Court of Delaware held that because Rambus’ “spoliation conduct was extensive, including within its scope the destruction of innumerable documents relating to all aspects of Rambus’ business”, the only appropriate sanction for the conduct was “to declare the patents in suit unenforceable against Micron”.

In the opinion issued today, Judge Whyte acknowledged the impact of the Delaware Court’s decision and declared that the cases should be stayed indefinitely, pending appeals of the Delaware spoliation and unenforceability decision and a spoliation decision by Judge Whyte in an earlier case involving Rambus and Hynix.

“While we are disappointed with the stay of the coordinated cases, it is our expectation that the conflicting opinions of the district courts regarding document spoliation will go up together on appeal. We believe that our view will be vindicated,” said Tom Lavelle, senior vice president and general counsel at Rambus.

Tags: Micron, Samsung, Hynix, Rambus, Nanya

Discussion

Comments currently: 2
Discussion started: 02/06/09 05:24:24 AM
Latest comment: 02/07/09 07:03:58 PM

[1-2]

1. 
It's just another example of justice mockery. And that us patent office d-tours their pathetic rules in case there are some higher bidders. Or we could say it's just a ripoff to Rambus and non us based companies.
0 0 [Posted by: OmegaHuman  | Date: 02/06/09 05:24:24 AM]
Reply

2. 
Hopefully this will be the beginning of the end for rambus and their litigious ways
0 0 [Posted by: alpha0ne  | Date: 02/07/09 07:03:58 PM]
Reply

[1-2]

Add your Comment




Related news

Latest News

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

8:52 pm | Lisa Su Appointed as New CEO of Advanced Micro Devices. Rory Read Steps Down, Lisa Su Becomes New CEO of AMD

Thursday, August 28, 2014

12:22 pm | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

9:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

6:41 pm | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture

Monday, August 25, 2014

6:05 pm | Chinese Inspur to Sell Mission-Critical Servers with AMD Software, Power 8 Processors. IBM to Enter Chinese Big Data Market with the Help from Inspur