Hynix v Rambus (San Jose, CA) Hynix files amendment to reply

“From meeting to meeting, Rambus’ representative at JEDEC carried JEDEC’s ideas and plans back to Rambus’ patent lawyers for the purpose of writing claims that would read on JEDEC’s pending and foreseeable standard for SDRAM memory.” (Beginning on page 2, line 26.)

“In preparation for its anticipated patent litigation, Rambus developed a plan to destroy evidence under the guise of a “document retention” policy.” (Beginning on page 3, line 20.)

“As indicative of Rambus’ deliberate and unconscionable spoliation of evidence, on September 2, 1998, Rambus organized “Shred Day” for its employees. All were provided with burlap bags so that they could haul documents to a “shredding truck.” On that one day, Rambus collected and shredded 20,000 pounds - - 10 tons - - of documents. Some 2 million pages of evidence vanished forever. Probably even more evidence was erased at the touch of a button or click of a mouse.” (Beginning on page 4, line 10.)

“In 1999 . . . Rambus organized a second “shred day.” (Beginning on page 4, line 21.)

“In 2000, Rambus organized a third “shred day,” (Beginning on page 4, line 24.)

“Rambus also instructed its outside counsel to destroy discoverable evidence . . .” (Beginning on page 4, line 27.)

“ . . . Rambus deliberately, tenaciously and unconsciously attempted to conceal its spoliation of evidence.” (Beginning on page 5, line 3.)

“The massive scope and extent of Rambus’ destruction of documents made it impossible for Hynix and others to obtain important and relevant evidence necessary to a full and fair defense of Rambus’ claims and establishment of Hynix’s affirmative defenses.” (Beginning page 6, line 5.)

“Mistaken or unjustified recognition of the rights Rambus asserts in this case will cost consumers billions and limit the availability of computers and other digital devices to the consuming public.

The economic monopoly threatened by Rambus’ patent claims is likely to continue for many years.

Rambus therefore comes into this court with unclean hands and is barred from enforcement of the patents in suit.” (Beginning page 6, line 12.)

Read the complete filing here.

Hat tip to Rambus Investor Relations for posting Hynix’s amendment.