Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc.

Good Law
609 F. Supp. 2d 988·2009 WL 541321·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17791
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 3, 2009C-00-20905 RMW, C-05-00334 RMW, C-06-00244 RMWCalifornia7,028 words

Opinion

Opinion

Whyte, J.

PHASE III (CONDUCT TRIAL) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This patent/antitrust litigation involves dynamic random access memory (“DRAM”) interface technology patented by Rambus and incorporated into industry-standard DRAMs. The litigation involves four actions. In the first action (Case No. 00-20905 or “Hynix /”), Hynix (then Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. and its subsidiaries) sued Rambus for a declaratory judgment regarding various Rambus patents. The court divided the issues into three trial phases. The issue in the first phase concerned whether Ram-bus’s patent infringement counterclaims were barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. On January 5, 2006 the court issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Unclean Hands in favor of Rambus. Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 591 F.Supp.2d 1038 (N.D.Cal.2006). The second phase concerned Rambus’s allegations that Hynix’s DRAMs infringed several of its patents. On April 26, 2006 a jury returned a verdict that Rambus’s patent claims were infringed and not invalid and that Rambus was entitled to $306,967,272 in damages. The court remitted the jury’s award to $133,584,129, which Rambus accepted.

The…

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.