Quotes From Judge Whyte's Order (Corrected Post)

From Judge Whyte's order of 3/7/05 in Hynix v. Rambus (San Jose, CA) A quick quote . . . . .

Litigation misconduct, while serving as a basis to dismiss the wrongful litigant, does not infect, or even affect, the original grant of the property right. (Cite). Even assuming that Rambus engaged in spoliation on so broad a scale as to impact the ability of all accused infringers, absent a showing of inequitable conduct before the PTO, Rambus's property right in its patents remains intact. (Cite). ("No case law from the Supreme Court or this court provides a basis for nullifying property rights granted by the United States when such property rights did not themselves accrue through inequitable conduct.") Thus, to the extent that Hynix's proposed amendment seeks to bar Rambus from enforcing patents other than patents-in-suit on the basis of unclean hands, it is futile. [Page 5, lines 4-12]. (Emphasis temporary added to correct – missing words – in original post.)

A second quote . . . . .

Here the allegation is spoliation. It is conceivable that Rambus's alleged spoliation efforts, although found to apply to other litigants, are in fact so pervasive that they also affect Rambus's assertion of patent rights against Hynix. To the extent Hynix contends that Rambus's misconduct constitutes spoliation efforts so pervasive that Hynix's equitable rights in the present litigation are affected, Hynix may properly allege the disputed conduct of its unclean hands theory. [Page 7, lines 27 & 28, Page 8, lines 1-4].