Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael A. Gottesman who wrote (8774)	1/24/2000 3:10:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Mike, It is discouraging that this can drag on potentially until October of 2000. Notice that Lexar has not tried to go public. There was some discussion way back in late '97 and early '98 regarding this matter and now it is 2000. The assumption I make is that this infringement case is of critical importance to Lexar. That is to say, it would be difficult to have an IPO underwritten with this case looming unsettled in the background. Ausdauer

To: Michael A. Gottesman who wrote (8774)	1/25/2000 8:54:00 PM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Michael, re: "infringement" vs. "willful infringement" Here's the latest I have been able to obtain from Judge Breyer's docketing clerk. I would have liked more info but she didn't have too much: 2/22/2000 - Hearing on a motion filed by the defendant to strike portions of the claims in plaintiff's brief. This may relate to some statements made by employees of Lexar that they knew they were infringing. Some mention was made of this in posts on this thread. I believe the inclusion of statements by several witnesses on behalf of the plaintiff (SanDisk) regarding the comments of the Lexar CEO during licensing fee negotiations is extremely damaging. Their latest motions indicate that the Lexar legal team wants this specific language removed from any briefs. On has to ask this question: Did Lexar cross the line between "infringement" to "willful infringement"? As I posted on the Yahoo SNDK Thread a while back the Lexar management highlighted on their website reads like a roster of disgruntled SanDisk ex-employees. I think a very strong and very compelling case can be built around "willful infringement". And with litigation going on for such a protracted period at this stage it seems unlikely that the SanDisk legal team is going to let them off lightly. I sense that Lexar is gasping for air here. The desperation is nearly palpable. Ausdauer *SanDisk...We put the "dig it!"* in digital.**