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: quidditch who wrote (9989)	4/1/2000 1:04:00 AM
From: Ausdauer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Steve, re: Lexar Media Whether or not Lexar plans to appeal this decision I think the IPO is greatly endangered. Read through the Lexar registration statement. It is grim. Recall that the hearing in question was postponed twice before yesterday's memorandum. Clearly all eyes (at least of interested parties) were on the decision handed down yesterday. I guess I would be a bit perturbed if someone were to talk me into the Lexar IPO at this stage. In fact, given the current circumstances it is almost criminal. If you listened to the c.c. you could sense in Dr. Harari's voice a degree of exasperation with the constant delays in the proceedings. Also, Lexar has had the moxie (sp?) to initiate separate unrelated litigation against not only SNDK, but also the CompactFlash Association (the latter suit was dropped). Lexar has also used misleading press releases to try to fortify their case against SanDisk (see the discussion here last Fall). I believe this type of conduct speaks volumes as to the quality of individuals at the helm of this company. SanDisk has the financial strength to pursue this matter to whatever extent necessary. I hope they push forward with an injunction. They have used injunctive relief successfully in the past against much greater foes. Recall also, if the suit goes to trial there is reason to believe that treble damages may apply to a decision in SanDisk's favor. This is because testimony has already been given in court that indicates Lexar willfully infringed on the patent in dispute. To make matters worse, several top Lexar executives are past SanDisk employees, including Jon Reemer, the Lexar CEO. In this poker game SanDisk is holding a royal flush. Lexar has a pair of 3's and their bluff is being called. This has gone way to far. Let the chips fall where they may. Ausdauer *Lexar Media...you can't make chicken salad out of chicken sh@!t**

To: quidditch who wrote (9989)	4/1/2000 1:21:00 AM
From: Ausdauer	Respond to of 60323

Steve, This was my third post ever to this discussion... Message 4024272 Can you believe the Lexar issue is still unsettled? Ausdauer

To: quidditch who wrote (9989)	4/1/2000 1:22:00 AM
From: The Prophet	Respond to of 60323

Again, if injunctive relief is granted, an appeal will be of little value to Lexar - they have little choice but to cave.

To: quidditch who wrote (9989)	4/1/2000 10:08:00 AM
From: Michael A. Gottesman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

Steven: Thank you for the detailed analysis which is a real contribution to the thread. Yes there are a lot of ifs and the major problem with obtaining information relating to the lawsuit has been, and remains, that much of the documentation, affidavits and submissions are under seal but the the IP nature of the claims. I am attempting to obtain at least a copy of J. Breyer's order to give us more guidance. Additionally, I understand that a member of the thread has e-mail correspondence from the lead counsel indicating that a press release will be forth coming. I would assume that SNDK will release the information when most advantageous (I'd do if the day before the IPO if I were them considering some of the business practices of Lexar - they issued a misleading PR shortly prior to a SNDK secondary offering). As to what "part" of the claim was subject to the granting of partial summary judgment, once again, without the actual complaint and motion filing, it is tough to say the impact of the ruling. However, if the partial SJ relates to "contributory infringement", it appear that at least "a patent" claim has been held valid and the cross motion to hold it "invalid" has been denied. Which patent - I do not know. As to whether Lexar will appeal - they have no choice but to "appeal" or "deal". I would anticipate that the next action called for by the Judge or Magistrate may be another settlement conference. However, I believe your analysis of Lexar's response to the ruling is well taken - they will do just as you say - vigorously disagree with the decision and indicate an intention to appeal in hopes of saving the offering. If I am able to obtain copies of the court documents, I will keep the thread advised. If any member of the thread has access to the Court ( my being from NJ), their help would be appreciated.