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: Jon Khymn who wrote (77192)	8/10/2001 5:22:06 PM
From: Don Green	Respond to of 93625

Judge overturns part of Rambus verdict in split decision By Semiconductor Business News Aug 10, 2001 (1:41 PM) URL: siliconstrategies.com RICHMOND, Va. -- A U.S. judge here cleared Rambus Inc. of alleged wrongdoing in setting industry standards for double data rate (DDR) synchronous DRAMs, but he also upheld a jury's verdict on fraud allegations in connection with SDRAM specifications, according to opposing sides in the civil case. Early this morning, Rambus claimed a victory in the judge's decision to clear the company of misconduct related to DDR standards activities and to set aside a jury's verdict in the much-publicized trial in May. But then, Infineon Technologies AG countered by saying it won a key decision from U.S. District Judge Robert E. Payne, who had denied Rambus' motion to set aside a verdict that held it liable for fraud in connection with the SDRAM standardization process. The judge's actions appear to give both sides a partial victory in the case, following a jury verdict against Rambus three months ago (see May 9 story). The judge's decision was issued on Thursday. Rambus still plans to appeal the patent infringement verdict pertaining to single-data-rate SDRAM, and the jury verdict on Rambus' behavior at JEDEC with regards to SDRAM standards, said Geoff Tate, chief executive officer of Rambus in Los Altos, Calif. "We aim to conclusively prove that Infineon is violating Rambus' patent rights and that Rambus must be justly compensated by Infineon for the use of our patents," Tate said. Rambus said the court rejected Infineon's motion to enjoin the company from pursing further patent infringement litigation regarding Infineon's DDR SDRAM memory products. The court did, however, prohibit Rambus from pursuing any litigation in the United States related to Infineon's JEDEC-compliant single-data-rate SDRAM memory products. The court also ordered Rambus to pay for a portion of Infineon's attorney fees, which Rambus plans to appeal. Meanwhile, Munich-based Infineon said the court found that "Rambus acted deliberately [pursuant to its business plan] and with callous disregard of its disclosure obligations and the rights of Infineon and other JEDEC members." Infineon said the court issued its "anit-suit" injunction against Rambus as a remedy for fraud. Infineon noted that Judge Payne had previously dismissed all of Rambus' patent infringement claims against its SDRAM and DDR SDRAM products. And the Munich chip maker said it was awarded over $7.1 million in attorney fees and expenses in the case. Rambus said it would immediately file an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC.

To: Jon Khymn who wrote (77192)	8/10/2001 5:31:12 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi Web Myst; Rambus is a hope stock. The share holders really don't believe that the company'll ever have to pay the $7 million. I'm glad to see that you made money in it, your timing was excellent. (Any stock trade that ends up as a profit is an "excellent" stock trade, lOL!!! Of course I'm supposing you're out or soon will be.) -- Carl

To: Jon Khymn who wrote (77192)	8/11/2001 8:47:14 AM
From: NightOwl	Respond to of 93625

Sorry WB, Looks like the law offers no "protections" for you speculators who hopped aboard after the jury verdict was announced. biz.yahoo.com It seems we were "entitled" to believe every ridiculous statement by old Tate, Avro, and Uncle INTC, Before Verdict;... but left to our individual responsibility After Verdict. However shall we manage on our own? <Hoo Hoo> I wonder what will produce the greatest loss for "class" members? The IFX suit or the "class" action? Beats me. All I know is that the traffic between one "class" pocket to the other "class" pocket is going to be hot and heavy. In any event I expect the legal types will catch all the flack for this. Never mind that the legal system is simply trying to deliver that "Free Lunch" that Mom & Pop are always drooling after. Frankly I think we would all be better off with the miscreants doing jail time. But then,... that would place a higher value on truth than on a used Yugo and the entire economic system would collapse. No, no. We can't have that. Better to go on with this "one size fits all" civil damage hoe down. ...As long as the fiddler keeps playing, Mom & Pop will never miss their tired old responsibility anyway. <Hoo Hooo> 0\|0