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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: sylvester80 who wrote (56350)10/3/2000 8:55:47 AM
From: mishedlo  Respond to of 93625
 
FROM YAHOO BOARD.

BY ANOTHER PATENT LAWYER.

###

Re: motion to dismiss vs. counterclaim
by: once_a_lawyer (M/Boston, MA) 10/2/00 7:44 pm
Msg: 167255 of 167376

Someone asked why Rambus is seeking dismissal of Micron's claims instead of filing a countersuit. I agree with itclyr's analysis, but I would also add that if Rambus' motion to dismiss Micron's complaint is DENIED, Rambus would then have 10 days to file its Answer and Counterclaim. There would be no point in filing the Counterclaim before the court ruled on the motion to dismiss.

Posted as a reply to: Msg 167132 by itclyr
========================================================
Looks like this is all coming to a head - quickly



To: sylvester80 who wrote (56350)10/3/2000 8:58:06 AM
From: mishedlo  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93625
 
FROM YAHOO BOARD.

BY ANOTHER PATENT LAWYER.

###

Re: motion to dismiss vs. counterclaim
by: once_a_lawyer (M/Boston, MA) 10/2/00 7:44 pm
Msg: 167255 of 167376

Someone asked why Rambus is seeking dismissal of Micron's claims instead of filing a countersuit. I agree with itclyr's analysis, but I would also add that if Rambus' motion to dismiss Micron's complaint is DENIED, Rambus would then have 10 days to file its Answer and Counterclaim. There would be no point in filing the Counterclaim before the court ruled on the motion to dismiss.

Posted as a reply to: Msg 167132 by itclyr



To: sylvester80 who wrote (56350)10/3/2000 9:02:37 AM
From: gnuman  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93625
 
sylvester. So Jeff's being published by Intel now. That certainly proves that DDR is dead. <VBG>