To: Steve Lee who wrote (1271 ) 11/18/2000 12:56:20 PM From: Steve Lee Respond to of 1881 SSTI asking court to reimpose stay of ITC exclusion order. IMO, SSTI is either very confident on this one or are going to be adversely affected by losing the case more than they make out. I vote for the confidence theory <vbg>.ssti.com SST Responds to ATMEL Announcement Regarding Enforcement of ITC Exclusion Order SUNNYVALE, Calif., Nov.16, 2000 -- SST (Silicon Storage Technology, Inc.) (Nasdaq: SSTI) announced today that it will request that the U.S. Court of Appeals issue a renewed stay of the U.S. International Trade Commission’s order prohibiting the importation into the U.S. of certain SST flash memory products manufactured for it by Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd. in Japan. Yesterday the Court lifted the stay of the ITC’s exclusion order, which it granted soon after the Exclusion Order was issued. “The Court’s stay was based primarily on the fact that the ITC made its exclusion order effective weeks before issuing an opinion giving the legal or factual basis for its action,” said Daniel Johnson, Jr., attorney for SST. “Now that we have the Opinion, and can point out numerous errors made by the Commission, we will ask the Court of Appeals to stay the effect of the Exclusion Order until this matter can be resolved on appeal.” Mr. Johnson also noted that the lifting of the stay does not alter the scope of the ITC’s Order, which affects only those parts manufactured by Sanyo for SST and imported into the U.S. as discreet stand alone devices, not devices embedded in other products by SST’s customers. The majority of SST’s products - those manufactured for it by other parties, and those sold to customers outside the U.S. - are not affected.