SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin
RMBS 96.82+5.9%12:07 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mishedlo who wrote (55145)9/26/2000 1:10:33 AM
From: NightOwl  Read Replies (2) of 93625
 
I am unimpressed by your apology, if in fact one was intended.

...Almost as unimpressed as I am with your docket entries.

Although I must say I am very impressed by the obvious decrease in the level of hot gasses emanating from Mountainview, Ca., these days.

The "docket entries" reposted to your link indicate that RMBS filed two Motions to Dismiss [for want of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a cause of action] late on the 18th of September. Yet we haven't heard the usual bleating of Mr. K or anyone from RMBS.

I can only assume that this indicates at least a temporary victory for the RMBS attorneys and a sign that they are taking the MU suit seriously. This bodes well for RMBS' chances.

...But the urge to "use" the PR is, like name calling, an old habit which dies hard. We will see whether these "new" attitudes are to be taken seriously.

Other than that, the only thing I can glean from this modest information is that RMBS has not asked any US Court to halt MU's U.S. production and sale of SDRAM/DDR. That's a fairly large shoe yet to drop and I don't know why RMBS has not put it in play.

I am sure they have their reasons for going the motion to dismiss route first, but I assume it means they don't feel it serves their interests to rush the MU litigation. Based on our complete lack of evidence on the underlying claims, I can't say that I would disagree with such an approach.

But the more interesting question for me is what effect, if any, MU's case could have on the other suits and license agreements that might be concluded before it is?

+|0
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News