California v. Infineon Technologies AG

Good Law
531 F. Supp. 2d 1124·2007 WL 2523363·35 A.L.R. 6th 627·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67475
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 31, 2007C 06-4333 PJHCalifornia25,459 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hamilton, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint came on for hearing before this court on February 7, 2007. Plaintiffs, forty individual states acting through their Attorneys General, and certain named government entities (collectively “plaintiffs” or “plaintiff States”), appeared through their respective counsel. Defendants appeared through their counsel, Julian Brew, Ronald C. Redcay, Joel S. Sanders, Peter Nemer-ovski, Kenneth R. O’Rourke, Harrison J. Frahn, Gary L. Hailing, and Robert B. Pringle. Having read all the papers submitted and carefully considered the relevant legal authority, the court hereby GRANTS defendants’ motion to dismiss in part and DENIES the motion to dismiss in part, for the reasons stated at the hearing, and as follows.

BACKGROUND

The instant case is closely related to a separate antitrust MDL action that is currently pending before the court, In re Dynamic Random Access Memory Antitrust Litigation, M 02-1486 PJH. Both actions generally allege a horizontal price-fixing conspiracy in the U.S. market for dynamic random access memory (“DRAM”), carried out by numerous manufacturer…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.