Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
178

178

Ratings: (0)|Views: 114|Likes:
Published by Tim Pescatello

More info:

Published by: Tim Pescatello on Jun 07, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/07/2013

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
04395.52001/5341702.6
 
 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.AND STMICROELECTRONICS INC. FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
K&L GATES LLPMichael J. Bettinger (Bar No. 122196)mike.bettinger@klgates.comStephen M. Everett (Bar No. 121619)stephen.everett@klgates.comCurt Holbreich (Bar No. 168053)curt.holbreich@klgates.comElaine Y. Chow (State Bar No. 194063)elaine.chow@klgates.comFour Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200San Francisco, CA 94111Tel: (415) 882-8200Fax: (415) 882-8220QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLPSean Pak (Bar No. 219032)seanpak@quinnemanuel.comPeter A. Klivans (Bar No. 236673) peterklivans@quinnemanuel.com50 California Street, 22
nd
Floor San Francisco, California 94111-4788Telephone: (415) 875-6600Facsimile: (415) 875-6700QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLPMichael D. Powell (Bar No. 202850)mikepowell@quinnemanuel.com555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5
th
Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065Telephone: (650) 801-5000Facsimile: 650 801-5100QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLPThomas D. Pease (admitted
 pro hac vice
)thomaspease@quinnemanuel.com51 Madison Avenue, 22
nd
Floor  New York, NY 10010Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLPRobert J. Becher (Bar No. 193431)robertbecher@quinnemanuel.com865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017Telephone: (213) 443-3000Facsimile: (213) 443-3100Attorneys for Defendants & CounterclaimantsSTMICROELECTRONICS N.V. andSTMICROELECTRONICS INC.UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISIONRAMBUS INC.,Plaintiff,vs.STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.;STMICROELECTRONICS INC.,Defendants.CASE NO. C 10-05449
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OFSTMICROELECTRONICS N.V. ANDSTMICROELECTRONICS INC. FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENTESTABLISHING CERTAIN FINDINGSREGARDING RAMBUS
S UNCLEANHANDS BASED ON COLLATERALESTOPPEL
Date: July 11, 2013Time: 1:30 pmCrtrm.: Courtroom 3, 17
th
Floor 
Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document178 Filed06/06/13 Page1 of 25
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
04395.52001/5341702.6
 -2-
 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.AND STMICROELECTRONICS INC. FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 11, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as thematter may be heard before the Honorable Richard Seeborg, United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Courthouse, Courtroom 3-17th Floor, 450 GoldenGate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, defendants STMicroelectronics N.V. andSTMicroelectronics Inc. will and hereby do move this Court for an order granting partial summary judgment that the following findings regarding Rambus
s unclean hands from the
 Micron v. Rambus
action in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and the
 Hynix v. Rambus
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California areentitled to collateral estoppel effect and should be treated as binding on Rambus Inc.:
 
(i) the finding of the
 Micron
court, affirmed by the Federal Circuit Court of Appealsand accorded collateral estoppel effect by the
 Hynix
court, that litigation was reasonablyforeseeable to Rambus by no later than December 1998 and Rambus destroyed documents duringits second shred day in 1999 in violation of its duty to preserve;(ii) the finding supported by both the
 Micron
and
 Hynix
courts
 
that Rambus
sdestruction was willful;(iii) the finding of both the
 Micron
and
 Hynix
courts that Rambus bears the burden toshow that its litigation opponents were not prejudiced by its destruction; and(iv) the finding of both the
 Micron
and
 Hynix
courts that the destruction prejudiced theassertion of JEDEC-based defenses by Rambus
s litigation opponents.Because all of the requisites for the application of the doctrine of collateral estoppel are satisfied,the Court should treat these findings as binding on Rambus in this action.
Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document178 Filed06/06/13 Page2 of 25
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
04395.52001/5341702.6
 -3-
 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.AND STMICROELECTRONICS INC. FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This motion is based on the following memorandum of points and authorities, theaccompanying declaration of Robert J. Becher, documentary evidence submitted herewith or citedherein, the evidence and argument presented at the hearing on this motion, and all matters of which the Court may take judicial notice.
Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document178 Filed06/06/13 Page3 of 25

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->