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 : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Green who wrote (69554)	4/3/2001 11:22:06 AM
From: Don Green	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Rambus vs. Infineon: final pre-trial meet set By: Tony Smith Posted: 03/04/2001 at 11:55 GMT theregister.co.uk The final pre-trial hearing in Rambus' legal action against Infineon has been set for 10 April in preparation for what a battle over patents that will have a major affect on the memory industry. That was the date the trial itself was expected to kick off, but that's been put back a week. In the trial, Rambus is hoping that the jury will side with it against Infineon, and declare that the German company has violated Rambus' SDRAM intellectual property. In the most recent pre-trial hearing, conducted on 29 March, Infineon tried to persuade Judge Robert E Payne to hear a motion asking for a summary judgement on the infringement claim. Infineon believes that, following the Judge's Markman Ruling - a key part of any patent infringement case, it essentially defines the range of allegations to be considered in the trial - there's enough of a case for a summary judgement dismissing Rambus' action. However, accepting Rambus' claim that it can pursue its case in good faith, it looks like Judge Payne will allow the jury trial to go ahead. "I'm not going to put [Rambus] to this task of defending summary judgement motions at the same time they are going through trying to pick up the aftermath of what should have been done before, without regard to whose fault it was," ruled Payne. Infineon won a small victory in that one Rambus expert witness, Dr Huber, will apparently not be allowed to testify, having changed his "characterisation of [Infineon] products" between his original report and a supplemental report issued after the Markman Ruling. Said the judge: "Flip-flops are all right, I suppose, for those who are running for elected office. They are not much good for experts or anybody else." Infineon's point is that Rambus' case that the trial should proceed with a jury is based on the validity of Huber's testimony. Having changed his mind, Huber's testimony is called into question, and thus so is Rambus' claim that it can proceed and, in good faith, prove infringement. The final pre-trial conference on 10 April will reveal whether Infineon's gambit pays off. ®