In Re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 23, 20194:18-cv-02518California1,192 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 MICHELE JONES, et al., Case No. 18-cv-02518-JSW (KAW)

Plaintiffs,

ORDER REGARDING JOINT

v. DISCOVERY LETTER

MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 103 Defendants.

Case No. 18-cv-3805-JSW (KAW)

IN RE DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS

MEMORY (DRAM) DIRECT ORDER REGARDING JOINT

PURCHASER ANTITRUST LITIGATION DISCOVERY LETTER

14 Re: Dkt. No. 52

The instant cases concern allegations that Defendants conspired to raise market prices for Dynamic Random Access Memory (“DRAM”) products. DRAM is a semiconductor memory device that is used in digital electronics, including mobile phones, personal computers, tablets, and televisions. Plaintiffs represent two groups: direct purchasers (“DP”), who buy DRAM directly from Defendants, and indirect purchasers (“IP”), who buy the products that DRAM has already been incorporated into. The DP complaints have been consolidated into In re…

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.