UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C.

In the Matter of: CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS HAVING SYNCHRONOUS DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY CONTROLLERS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

Investigation No. 337-TA-661

JOINT PETITION OF COMPLAINANT RAMBUS INC. AND RESPONDENT NVIDIA CORPORATION TO RESCIND LIMITED EXCLUSION ORDER AND CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS

Complainant Rambus Inc. and Respondent NVIDIA Corporation hereby jointly petition that the Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders issued by the Commission in the above-captioned proceeding on July 26, 2010, be rescinded pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(k) and 19 C.F.R. 210.76(a). Rescission is warranted on the basis of changed conditions of fact or law stemming from a settlement between Rambus and NVIDIA, which provides that all articles currently covered by the Commissions remedial orders are now licensed. These articles include both the covered products manufactured and/or sold by NVIDIA, as well as all products imported or sold by the other named Respondents that contain covered NVIDIA products. Copies of the relevant agreements are submitted as Exhibits A and B. Rambus and NVIDIA reached an agreement to settle this Investigation and entered into a Settlement Agreement and the Patent License Agreement (the Agreements). The settlement between Rambus and NVIDIA is designed to resolve and resolves the underlying dispute

between all of the parties (including all of the other Respondents), both before the Commission and elsewhere. The Agreements relating to the settlement have been executed by Rambus and NVIDIA and are fully effective as between them. Under the terms of the Agreements, all conduct previously prohibited by the Commissions remedial orders has been authorized by a license granted by Rambus to NVIDIA. Because NVIDIAs products have been licensed, the previously prohibited conduct of the other named Respondents to the Investigation, which flowed from those Respondents activities involving products containing NVIDIAs products, has also been authorized. Because all previously prohibited conduct has been authorized, Rambus and NVIDIA seek rescission of the Commissions Limited Exclusion Order in its entirety, as well as rescission of the Commissions Cease and Desist Orders. The settlement reached between Rambus and NVIDIA allows NVIDIA to continue to manufacture products under license, and by extension permits the other named Respondents to import and sell products that contain those products. Thus, the settlement changes conditions of fact and law that are applicable to all Respondents.

In situations where a respondents conduct becomes authorized by way of settlement, the

Commission has routinely found changed circumstances to exist, and has rescinded remedial orders on that basis.1

See Certain Sortation Systems, Parts Thereof and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337TA-460, Commn Notice (Mar. 3, 2005) (rescinding limited exclusion order); Certain Integrated Circuits, Processes for Making Same, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-450, Commn Order (Apr. 23, 2003) (rescinding limited exclusion order and vacating ALJs Order No. 5); Certain Condensers, Parts Thereof and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA334, Commn Notice (Oct. 10, 2000) (rescinding limited exclusion order); Certain Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing Systems and Components thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-397, (continued on next page)

Request for Non-Disclosure of Settlement Terms Rambus and NVIDIA are providing two versions of the Agreements with this petition: Confidential Exhibit A is the complete and unredacted Agreements and is being provided to the Commission and the Staff. Exhibit B is the public version of the Agreements.

Rambus and NVIDIA request confidential treatment of the unredacted versions of the Agreements. In order to promote settlement, Rambus and NVIDIA request that the sensitive financial information that is contained solely in the unredacted Agreements be maintained as confidential. Settlement of litigation is considered to be in the public interest,2 and

maintaining the confidentiality of information is a powerful tool in achieving settlements of 337 investigations. The specific bracketed terms of the Agreements contain highly sensitive

information, disclosure of which could provide an unfair advantage to the competitors and/or customers of Rambus and NVIDIA. See Certain Semiconductor Chip Products and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-753, Order Nos. 26 and 60 (Initial Determinations respectively terminating Freescale and Broadcom and approving redactions to versions of settlement agreements served on non-settling Respondents); Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors and Products Containing Same, Including Memory Modules, Inv. No. (continued from previous page) Commn Notice (July 30, 1998) (rescinding a consent order); Certain Flash Memory Circuits and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-382, Commn Notice (Sept. 18, 1997) (rescinding limited exclusion order and cease and desist order). Certain Microcomputer Memory Controllers, Components Thereof and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-331, Initial Determination and Order No. 28 Concerning Violation of Section 337 (Nov. 16, 2002) at *2.
2

337-TA-707, Order No. 10 (Initial Determination) (June 29, 2010); Certain Automotive Multimedia Display and Navigation Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-657, Order No. 27 (Initial Determination) (June 23, 2009); Certain Machine Vision Software, Machine Vision Systems, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-680, Order No. 17 (Initial Determination), 2009 WL 3535542 (Oct. 26, 2009) (it has been recognized, both in section 337 investigations and in district court cases, that forcing settling respondents and complainants to reveal the precise terms of their settlements to non-settling respondents could discourage settlements, even if such disclosures were made only to counsel who have subscribed to the protective order.); Certain Hydraulic Excavators and Components Thereof Inv. No. 337-TA-582, Order No. 49, 2007 WL 2328098 (Aug. 13, 2007) (ordering that only the public version of settlement agreement should be served on non-settling respondents) (In order to foster settlement in this case, it is necessary to protect the exact terms of the settlement agreement against disclosure to the non-settling respondents.). The unredacted versions of the Agreements are intended for the sole use of the ALJ, the Commission, and the OUII Investigative Staff Attorney. The redacted versions of the

Agreements are intended for release to the public and the other parties in this investigation. Conclusion For the reasons set forth above, Rambus and NVIDIA respectfully request that the Commission rescind in their entirety all of the remedial orders currently in place in this matter, including the Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders issued by the Commission in the above-captioned proceeding on July 26, 2010, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(k) and 19 C.F.R. 210.76(a) in light of the changed conditions of law or fact created by the settlement between Rambus and NVIDIA.

Dated: February 10, 2012

/s/ Doris Johnson Hines J. Michael Jakes Doris Johnson Hines Christine E. Lehman Kathleen A. Daley Naveen Modi Luke J. McCammon FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P. 901 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001-4413 Michael J. McCabe Jason E. Stach Brannon C. McKay FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P. 303 Peachtree Street, N.E. Sun Trust Plaza, Suite 3500 Atlanta, Georgia 30308-3263 Attorneys for Complainant Rambus Inc. /s/ I. Neel Chatterjee I. Neel Chatterjee ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP 1000 Marsh Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Attorneys for Respondent NVIDIA Corporation

EXHIBIT B