Humor?

The1stBA says . . . "Not again, I thought he left The District!"

Rambus share price climbs

Reuters reported and then updated (11/29/05) the rise in share price experienced by Rambus following a Wall Street Journal article reporting that Samsung had filed court papers settling with the US Department of Justice for a $300,ooo,ooo fine for conspiring to fix DRAM prices, including DRAM and included Rambus IP, RDRAM.

The hearing on the Samsung plea is expected to be heard by Judge Phyllis Hamilton on November 30, 2005.

Read the Reuters article here.

Hat tip to FinzToRite for the link.

Song of the day

"Too Long"

by Quicksilver Messenger Service (1968)

Quicksilver Messenger Service -- Quicksilver Messenger Service

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Jedi predicts a settlement?

Spies located in the Pinehurst quadrant purloined this e-mail . . .

"a disturbance in the force I sense master joe. the three will become two."

Samsung "screwed Rambus?"

The inquirer checks in with this headline . . . Samsung screwed Rambus using price fixing . . . believes . . .

The documents are a gold mine for the briefs at Rambus who are suing Samsung along with its other alleged conspirators Micron and Hynix.

Read the article at the inquirer linked here.

Hat tip to Joe of the Pinehurst Thread for the link.

No Rambus patents issued this week

Hat tip to FinzToRite for checking.

End of post.

New link - Ramboids Frappr

See links in right column.

Humor

An elderly man in Florida had owned a large farm for several years. He had a large pond in the back, fixed up nice picnic tables, horseshoe courts, and some apple and peach trees. The pond was properly shaped and fixed up for swimming when it was built.

One evening the old farmer decided to go down to the pond, as he hadn't been there for a while, and look it over.

He grabbed a five gallon bucket to bring back some fruit. As he neared the pond, he heard voices shouting and laughing with glee. As he came closer he saw it was a bunch of young women skinny-dipping in his pond. He made the women aware of his presence and they all went to the deep end.

One of the women shouted to him, "We're not coming out until you leave!"

The old man frowned, "I didn't come down here to watch you ladies swim naked or make you get out of the pond naked." Holding the bucket up he said, "I'm here to feed the alligator!"

Moral: Old men can still think fast.

Hat tip Doctorweld of the Pinehurst Thread.

Song of the day

Here's hoping the Bus is gonna run like one

"Hot Rod Lincoln"

by Commander Cody & His Lost Planet Airmen


Commander Cody & His Lost Planet Airmen -- Lost In The Ozone

The album has it least one other potential Rambus Song Of The Day:

-- What's The Matter Now?

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Early Christmas in the Eulau house?

Rambus CFO reports that he made a gift of 200 shares of Rambus. That leaves him with 17216 shares.

Read the Statement Of Changes In Beneficial Ownership Of Securities (Form 4) linked here.

Mr. Eulau, please feel free to add Any Donkey to your Christmas list.

Taiwan says, "no license - don't care"

Forbes reports that Taiwanese authorities have granted the island's Department of Health permission to produce Tamiflu despite its failure to obtain a license from Roche. Tamiflu is an anti-viral that is hoped to check bird flu.

Reportedly, the Taiwanese manufactured Tamiflu would only be used if Roche could not deliver what the island required to stem the bird flu. Also, authorities indicated that they will continue to seek a license from Roche and will discuss compensation.

Donkey comment:

A very real epidemic that should be concerning industrialized nations is the stealing of intellectual property.

Read the Forbes article linked here.

Hat tip to Curry.com.

Xbox 360 to ship weekly

Quoting Xbox Live's Major Nelson's Unofficial Blog:

I double checked with the retail team, and while I can't speak to each retail outlets specific distribution strategy, I can tell you that we (Xbox) have a weekly replenishment strategy. That means that we have new shipments of Xbox 360's being sent out each week.

Hat tip to Zagaki for the link.

Just for fun

Follows is a link to a music video of a house dressed in holiday lights with the lights flashing in various sequences in time with the music - link here.

The video is about three minutes.

Hat tip to Larry of the Pinehurst Thread.

Song of the day

We've been there for far too long .......

"Side Of The Road"

by Lucinda Williams

Lucinda Williams -- Lucinda Williams

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Schaeffer gives RMBS 4.5 / 10

With typical analyst double speak, Schaeffer applauds and then hisses. You have to admire the opportunity that Schaeffer creates itself . . . if RMBS climbs, falls or even heads sideways, there will be quotes to cite in future writings. Here are a couple examples:

On Wednesday, the shares took out a troublesome area of resistance at the 15 level on rather heavy volume. This could be a good sign for RMBS going forward, especially given the strength in the semiconductor sector as whole.

There could be a bit of a bump at the 17 level, due to a heavy build up of calls. But if the shares can overcome their 20-month moving average and the 16 level, I don't see the 17 level causing too much of a problem.

Then Schaeffer blasts RMBS to cover its bases:

In conclusion, your honor, with RMBS constantly in a state of legal flux, I find it hard to recommend this equity as a buy to any investor. Compounding this legal backdrop is a lack of what I would consider to be "extreme" pessimism from the investing community. Furthermore, RMBS still has a couple major technical hurdles to overcome before making any meaningful advances. As a result, our Schaeffer's Equity Scorecard rating for RMBS falls at a meager 4.5 out of 10.

Plenty of opportunity to be right on the money.

Follow this link to Schaeffer and register for a free membership and read the entire article here.

Pat Morita has died

Pat Morita passed away November 24, 2005, at the age of 73, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Morita, the son of migrant worker parents, developed spinal tuberculosis and at the age of 2 and then spent the next nine years in treatment at the Weimar Joint Sanatorium in Northern California and for a brief period at the Shriner's Hospital in San Francisco. Upon his release, he was escorted by an FBI agent to join his parents at an internment camp in Arizona.

The Sacramento Bee reports:

Morita's ethnicity was central to his comedy, but it also occasionally put him in an uncomfortable position before certain audiences. He dealt with it quite directly. Like the time he learned - minutes before taking a stage in Honolulu where he was filling in for Don Ho - that his crowd was mostly disabled American veterans marking the 25th anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

"I turned on all the angelic, cherubic charm I could find and I went out and said, 'Before I begin, I just want to say I'm sorry about messing up your harbor,'" Morita said in a 1986 interview with the Los Angeles Times.

The line, Morita recalled, drew a second of silence before laughter began at the rear of the audience and rolled forward.

A nice article can be read here - Noriyuki Pat Morita:In the Footsteps of a Sensei.

Read about Morita's credits here.

Read the Wikipedia article here.

Xbox 360 = Crashbox?

There are more than a few reports of Xbox 360 crashing, hanging up and displaying weird screens.

Check out the wrecks at Having problems with your Xbox 360? linked at teamxbox.com.

Some are suggesting that heat is the culprit. Rahul Sood suggests a simple solution - hanging your Xbox 360 from the ceiling. Read about it at Mr. Sood's blog linked here.

View a few funky Xbox 360 screens here.

Song of the day

"Where Do We Go From Here"

by Chicago (Chicago II)

We could have picked a few other Rambus Song hopefuls on this double album:

-- Make Me Smile

-- Anxiety's Moment

-- 25 Or 6 To 4 (We've Already Seen That)

-- Prelude

and for those RMBS investors in West Virginia

-- Vest Virginia Fantasies

Submitted by FinzToRite.



Remastered and repackaged edition of their 1970 album. Features hits including 'Make Me Smile', 'Color My World', and more. 2 bonus tracks, single versions of 'Make Me Smile' and '25 Or 6 To 4.' Digipak in a slipcase with a 16 page booklet featuring complete lyrics and detailed liner notes by Rolling Stone contributing editor David Wild. 2002.

A light note - why America will win the war

Nope, Treowth isn't going to go political on you!

This is a link to a music video. It will make you chuckle and should offend nobody.

Link - Way to Armadillo.

Hat tip to Dubious Wonder.

Xbox 360 - red ink (Updated)

iSupply has dissected Xbox 360, component by component. The estimated total of Bill-of-Materials (BOM) reaches $525 for the Xbox 360 Premium. BOM does not include the cost of assembly, packaging, distribution, marketing and the retailers' cut. The Xbox 360 Premium has a suggested retail price of $399.

The most expensive single component in the Xbox 360 is the GPU designed by ATI Technologies. Its High-Definition graphics costs an estimated $141, including embedded DRAM from NEC.

The IBM designed and co-manufactured Xbox microprocessor, a triple-core PowerPC that runs at a frequency of 3.2GHz, costs an estimated $106, according to preliminary findings from the iSuppli Teardown Analysis Service.

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., provides the main memory, 512Mbytes of GDDR DRAM for an estimated $65.

The total motherboard cost is estimated at $370.00.

Read about the Xbox 360 teardown and services available from iSupply here.

Update

Read an article in The Register regarding the iSupply research here.

Hat to Joe for The Register link.

Happy Thanksgiving

Blessings on all - especially those protecting America, her allies and interests.

Song of the day

"Wake Me On Judgement Day"

by Steve Winwood

Steve Winwood -- Back in the High Life

Winwood might have written a "Future Rambus Song Of The Day"
in "Back In The High Life"

Other Rambus Blues-worthy tracks on the album include:

-- Split Decision

-- The Finer Things (I'll Have If RMBS Wins)

-- Take It As It Comes

Submitted by FinzToRite>

Song of the day

Dedicated to Rambus Public Relations

"Silent Treatment"

by Atlanta Rhythm Section

Submitted by FinzToRite.

It's a PTO double

United States Patent 6,968,024

Perino November 22, 2005

Apparatus and method for operating a master-slave system with a clock signal and a separate phase signal

Abstract
A master-slave system includes a clock and phase signal generator to produce a clock signal at a given frequency and a phase signal at an effective frequency, where the phase signal may or may not be periodic and has an effective frequency less than the given frequency. A clock line is connected to the clock and phase signal generator to carry the clock signal. A phase line is connected to the clock and phase signal generator to carry the phase signal. The phase line includes a phase-to-master path to carry a phase-to-master phase signal and a phase-from-master path to carry a phase-from-master phase signal. A master device is connected to the clock line and the phase line. A data bus is connected to the master device. A slave device is connected to the data bus, the clock line and the phase line. The slave device processes data on the data bus in response to the clock signal and the phase signal.

Inventors: Perino; Donald V. (North Potomac, MD)

Assignee: Rambus Inc. (Los Altos, CA)

Appl. No.: 629862

Filed: August 1, 2000


****

United States Patent 6,967,514

Kizer November 22, 2005

Method and apparatus for digital duty cycle adjustment

Abstract
Adjusting a clock duty cycle. An incremental error signal is generated in response to the clock signal. A cumulative error signal is generated in response to the incremental error signal. The incremental error signal is reset and the duty cycle of the clock signal is adjusted in response to the cumulative error signal.

Inventors:
Kizer; Jade M. (Mountain View, CA); Vu; Roxanne T. (San Jose, CA)

Assignee:
Rambus, Inc. (Los Altos, CA)

Appl. No.: 277738

Filed: October 21, 2002

Hat tip to FinzToRite for the PTO links.

Qualcomm - Forbes Article

It is a bit long, but it is an interesting read:

Cellular Scion by David Whelan linked here.

Some quick snips:

Qualcomm faces a thicket of new challenges--a revolt by some of its biggest customers, an antitrust suit led by corporate killer David Boies and an unrelenting pace of wireless innovation that could render Qualcomm irrelevant if it doesn't constantly update its patent library.

"We said, ‘Let's create a cellular market for Wi-Fi,'" says Scott Richardson, chief of Intel's Wimax business. "There is going to be a battle." Sprint, Nokia and Motorola, and a new venture from wireless billionaire Craig McCaw, are lining up behind Wimax.

Paul Jacobs dismisses the myriad threats . . .Intel's Wimax dream is little more than a PowerPoint presentation, he adds. "They're the kind of people who see the world as a nail because they have a hammer."

The CDMA design now reaps more than $2 billion a year in patent fees for Qualcomm, which collects a de facto tax of 5% or so on the wholesale price of one-quarter of the 750 million cell phones sold around the world every year. Some 90% of this fee flow goes into earnings before taxes.

Hat tip to Forbes.

DDR2 prices continue to fall

Hans Wu & Carrie Yu writing for DigiTimes.com report that DDR2 prices are falling as manufacturers attempt to stimulate demand.

Eric Tang, vice president and spokesman of Powerchip Semiconductor Corporation (PSC) said recently that DDR2 will not become mainstream until the second quarter of 2006, when DDR2 supported chipset supply from Intel becomes smoother.

Read the article at DigiTimes linked here.

Hat tip to Joe of the Pinehurst Thread.

Microlinc, LLC, the mouse that roars?

Microlinc, LLC, from Texas has reportedly filed suit against the likes of ACER, AMD, ATI, Dell, Gateway, HP, Intel, Nvidia, Sony and Toshiba for infringing on its patent 6,009,488.

Read an article in the Inquirer linked here.

Patent 6,009,488, ('488) captioned Computer having packet-based interconnect channel is linked here.

'488 references ten US Patents. Of those ten, five are patents held by Rambus, namely:

5,390,308 - Method and apparatus for address mapping of dynamic random access memory - issued 2/14/95.

5,499,385 - Method for accessing and transmitting data to/from a memory in packets - issued 3/12/96.

5,606,717 - Memory circuitry having bus interface for receiving information in packets and access time registers - issued 2/25/97.

5,809,263 - Integrated circuit I/O using a high performance bus interface - 3/15/98.

5,872,996 - Method and apparatus for transmitting memory requests by transmitting portions of count data in adjacent words of a packet -2/16/99.

The inquirer reports:

Microlinc claims that Intel infringes its patents in a number of chipsets and promulgates that by promoting PCI Express - which encourages the creation of systems that breach its patent.

Ramboids pause as they contemplate thpossibilityty of a PCI Express litigation fest on the horizon.

Hat tip to Joe of the Pinehurst Thread for the link.

Song of the day (Sunday)

"Shakedown Street" by The Grateful Dead

(Has The Bus Been On This Street All Along?)

Grateful Dead -- Shakedown Street

The album contains one of the nominees for

"The Ultimate Rambus Investor Theme Song"

-- I Need A Miracle

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Buckwheat to save lives?

Buckwheat may help save the life of somebody you love.

Visit JJSDiabetes linked here and in the Links column.

You may learn something that will change a life.

Investors Hub Link

Treowth's Investors Hub link - found under "Links" in the right column, has been repaired.

The repaired link clicks directly to the Rambus board.

Hat tip to ThreeJack and Matt for the help.

Cell Processor $150 +?

A Cell Processor wafer is estimated to currently cost between $9,000 & $10,000 by IBM to manufacture. Factor in failure, waste and packaging the cost per Cell Processor is running $150 plus.

The Inquirer opines that with 200 good sites on a wafer, IBM may be able to knock off $100 per Cell Processor.

Read the article by Charlie Demerjain in the Inquirer linked here. Article includes a nice picture of a Cell wafer.

Hat tip to Joe of the Pinehurst Thread for the link.

Custom computers

Do you want a custom laptop or desktop? Rahul Sood of Voodoo PC will whip you up one.

Regarding the one on the left Mr. Sood wrote:

Check out this powder pink ENVY notebook with a custom tattoo. This was created for a famous pop-star, and apparently she loves to play the "Sims Online". We’ve created a few similar units like this – but this one is unique in that we put another tattoo with her brand on the palm rest.

Check out Mr. Sood's blog linked here. You can learn more about custom computers by Mr. Sood at VoodooPC linked here.

You Be The Judge - Update IV

The Honorable Robert E. Payne continues to attract attention with 59 surveys completed and 38 comments. A couple recent comments:

Judge Payne is a clear and present danger to innovation in America, the public trust in the judiciary and domestic/international enforcement of intellectual property. He is a degenerate judge caring the torch of persecution against a small innovative IP company from California on behalf of a convicted cartel of international corporations from Germany, Korea and the USA who are set to destroy their victim. It is sad that still no public outrage of this blatant persecution has been raised, a testament to the decline of this once great nation. Judge Payne's blatant, pathological bias against Rambus cost Rambus and Rambus investors billions of dollars and years of subdued innovative potential. . . .

There needs to be an open investigation with his relationships to his former law firm, the FTC and PAC's, Samsung, Hynix, Infineon, Micron Technology, Nanya etc., and finally, Real Estate. . .

Read the complete comments and others at Courthouse Forum linked here.

Song of the day

"Feels Like Forever" by Joe Cocker

Joe Cocker -- Night Calls

Other Rambus Blues-worthy tracks on the album include:

-- Now That The Magic Has Gone

-- Please No More

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Song of the day

"Thirty Days In The Hole"

by Humble Pie

(WELL, ACTUALLY, 2190 DAYS, BUT WHO'S COUNTING?)

Other Rambus Blues-worthy tracks on the album include:

-- The Fixer

-- Hot 'N' Nasty

-- I Wonder


Submitted by FinzToRite.

You Be The Judge - Update III

The Honorable Robert E. Payne is leading the bench in number of recent evaluations with 54. His cumulative GPA is 0.38 or "F".

Judge - Grade - # of Evaluations

Robert E. Payne - F (0.38) 54

David Medina - A (4.00) 5

Ronald M. Whyte - A- (3.66) 5

You may visit the Courthouse Forum - You Be The Judge linked here.

Who is TR Labs? (Updated - Map link)

TRLabs is the largest not-for-profit telecommunications research consortium in Canada. It was established in 1986, as an applied research consortium based on industry, university and government collaboration focused on commercialization of telecommunications technologies.

Its research program is focused on five strategic areas:

data networking

network access

network systems

photonics

wireless communications

Major Industrial Members:

Manitoba Hydro

NMI Mobility

Nortel Networks

PMC-Sierra

Samsung

Saskatoon Health Region

SaskTe

Sun Microsystems

TDV Globa

TELUS

VPI Virtual Photonics

***

TR Labs site is linked here.

Google Maps link to Payne Road.

TR Labs v Rambus

U.S. District CourtEastern District of Virginia (Richmond)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:05-cv-00789-REP

Alberta Telecommunications Research Centre v. Rambus, Inc.

Assigned to: Honorable District Robert E. Payne

Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement

Date Filed: 11/15/2005

Jury Demand: Plaintiff

Nature of Suit: 830 Patent

Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff

Alberta Telecommunications Research Centre a Canadian Corporation doing business asTR Labs

represented by

Dana Duane McDaniel
Spotts Fain PC
411 E Franklin St
PO Box 1555
Richmond, VA 23218-1555
(804) 788-1190
LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Hugh McCoy Fain, III
Spotts Fain PC
411 E Franklin St
PO Box 1555
Richmond, VA 23218-1555
(804) 788-1190

Mary Elizabeth Skora Davis
Spotts Fain PC
411 E Franklin St
PO Box 1555
Richmond, VA 23218-1555
(804) 788-1190

Maurice Francis Mullins
Spotts Fain PC
411 E Franklin St
PO Box 1555
Richmond, VA 23218-1555
(804) 788-1190

Defendant
Rambus, Inc. a California Corporation

Date Filed # Docket Text

11/15/2005 1 COMPLAINT against Rambus, Inc. Filing fee $250, receipt number 80706, filed by Alberta Telecommunications Research Centre. (jtho, ) (Entered: 11/16/2005)

11/15/2005 2 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Alberta Telecommunications Research Centre. (jtho, ) (Entered: 11/16/2005)

11/16/2005 Summons Issued as to Rambus, Inc. (called atty. to arrange for service) (jtho, ) (Entered: 11/16/2005)

When in a hospital . . .

Helpful tips for hospital patients, drawn from life...

1. If your nurse is trying to get a history from you, it's not the time to answer your cell phone, order a pizza, start manicuring your nails, try to set up your 'Net connection, or take calls from your constituents.

2. Likewise, if you're the family member of a patient who has global aphasia (think: unable to speak, write, or comprehend; limited only to pleasant smiles and gestures), now is not the time to book it toward the exit door. Stick around. Knowing what Mom is allergic to is really nice in these situations.

3. If you are one of those people lucky enough to have an entourage, whether privately or publicly funded, they're going to have to leave the room during the exam. The gentleman with the expensive suit, earpiece, and suspicious lump in the armpit of his suit will not tell me more about your neurological status than I can find out on my own.

4. A special note for elderly Yankees, or those who have moved to Florida: I don't know what kind of nurses they have in your universe, but I am not "the girl." I am not a waitress, maid, personal secretary, dogsbody, factotum, or whore. I have a particular job to do, and you're not making it much easier. Plus, the amount of money you donated to the hospital makes little or no difference to me. You're still gonna get stuck.

Read more helpful tips at Head Nurse - This Won't Hurt A Bit, linked here.

Hat tip to Jo of Head Nurse.

Humor

Hat tip to The1stBA

Song of the day

"Getting Tired Of Waiting"

by Jimmy Thackery & The (Bus) Drivers

Jimmy Thackery & The Drivers -- Empty Arms Motel

Other Rambus Blues-worthy tracks on the album:

-- (Rambus Has Me) Lickin' Gravy

-- Rude Mood

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Ramboid musical trivia

Fool in the Rain . . .

stored on FinzToRite's iPod with this picture.

DRAM market heading down?

Gartner forecasts that the DRAM market is in a long-term decline. Expected are major pricing corrections with component pricing dropping by 50% in 2007. Increased capacity in late 2006 when vendors move from 100nm manufacturing to 90mn will add to the supply stream.

Read an article in EETimes linked here.

Hat tip to the Wizard of Pinehurst for the link.

Xbox launch - bring your caffeine

If Xbox 360 creates this much excitement, can you image the PS3 launch?

More than 1,600 GameStop outlets will be open at 12:01 a.m. on November 22 to celebrate the launch of the first next-generation systems. Gamers packing up Mountain Dew and beef jerky in preparation of camping out to be the first on the block with one of the systems better have confirmation that their preorders have been filled.

Read about the launch at Gamespot linked here.

Scotty's flight delayed

James Doohan, better known as engineer Scotty of the Star Trek Enterprise, will have his flight to the final frontier delayed due to engine trouble.

Space Services will launch the Explorer Flight with Scotty’s ashes and those of at least 167 others into earth's firmanment once the engine trouble has been resolved. The delay has reportedly allowed others to “participate in the flight.” (People, please, no pushing!)

Space Services has already added the remains of Star Trek creater Gene Roddenberry and 1960’s drug guru Timothy Leary to earth's sunrise.

Read an article from the Sidney Morning Herald linked here.

Song of the day

"Nothing Is Easy" by Jethro Tull

Jethro Tull -- Stand Up

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Elpida delivers DDR3 modules to Intel

Elpida Memory announced (11/14/05) that it has delivered DDR3 SDRAM Memory Modules to Intel. It claims that the 512 Megabyte and 1 Gigabyte DIMM Samples Achieve GHz-class Speeds.

From the press release:

"The availability of these samples allows systems developers such as Intel to evaluate new features and GHz-class performance across all DIMM sockets on the motherboard with the memory controller and the processor," said Jun Kitano, director of Technical Marketing for Elpida Memory (USA). "The new DDR3 platform provides nearly twice the performance of the DDR2 architecture, and it is gaining great momentum."

Read the entire news release at Elpida Memory linked here.

Read a short article at tgdaily.com here.

Hat tip to Joe, the Wizard of Pinehurst, for the link.

One Amigo to fold or ask for another card?

It was initially reported that Infineon was selling its DRAM operations in the US to Micron and the rest to Nanya. Read the November 14, 2005, EETimes article here.

Now it is being reported that Infineon’s board, meeting on November 17, 2005, may split off the DRAM business and sell it via an IPO. Read the November 15, 2005, EETimes article here.

However and whenever Infineon flushes its DRAM business, it is certain that the sink of the Munich Germany based company will be crusted with scum.

Techworld.com nicely summed Infineons woes:

- Infineon was embroiled in EU and US price-fixing investigations in early March last year.
- It's CEO resigned later that month for 'personal reasons'.
- A Siemens' putsch forced more executives out.
- Investments were announced for its Richmond, USA, DRAM plant in April.
- Notwithstanding this there was speculation that it was getting out of the DRAM business in May, 2004.
- In September, 2004, Infineon pleaded guilty to price-fixing.
- In December, 2004, it was still involved in a patent dispute with Rambus.
- This suit was settled in March, 2005, with Infineon agreeing to pay Rambus royalties going forward.
- In June, 2005, it was selling off non-core businesses to concentrate on memory production.
- In July, 2005, the head of the Infineon memory chip business resigned in a furore over motor racing sponsorship deals.

Read the entire techworld.com article here.

Rambus adds to the patent portfolio

United States Patent 6,965,262

Zerbe November 15, 2005

Method and apparatus for receiving high speed signals with low latency

Abstract
An apparatus and method for receiving high-speed signals having a wide common-mode range with low input-to-output latency. In one embodiment, the receiver includes an integrator to accumulate charge in accordance with an input signal during an integration time interval to produce an output voltage. A sense amplifier samples and converts the output voltage of the integrator to a logic signal; and a latch stores the logic signal. In an alternate embodiment, a preamplifier conditions the input signal prior to being integrated. In another embodiment using multiple receivers, circuitry is added to the receiver to compensate for timing errors associated with the distribution of the timing signals. In yet another embodiment, the integrator is coupled to an equalization circuit that compensates for intersymbol interference. In another embodiment, another circuit compensates for accumulated voltage offset errors in the integrator.

Inventors: Zerbe; Jared L. (Woodside, CA)

Assignee: Rambus Inc. (Los Altos, CA)

Appl. No.: 123370

Filed: April 15, 2002

Song of the day

"Pacing The Cage"

by Bruce Cockburn

Bruce Cockburn -- The Charity of Night

Submitted by FinzToRite.

You Be The Judge - Update II

The Honorable Robert E. Payne is leading the list in recent survey completions. His total is 54. The next closest member of the bench has a total of 5 recent survey completions.

View the survey statistics at Courthouse Forum here.

You Be The Judge - Update I

Early results are in - the Honorable Robert E. Payne, is not well-respected by those who have registered their opinions.

54 individuals have participated in the Survey.

33 individuals have left comments.

Survey results are well, appalling: D's and F's with a smattering of C's.

Comments are well, again appalling:

As a practicing attorney for over 45 years and an avid follower of the litigation presided over by Judge Payne as well as other legal proceedings in which Rambus, Inc. has been involved, I am shocked and extremely disappointed for our judicial system by this judge's obviously biased . . .

payne is the best judge money can buy. . .

Judge Payne has proven to have a agenda . . .

He is a shameful and dishonorable person. He is a criminal. . .

Demonstrating impartiality, integrity and honesty? Allowing both parties to be heard? Is there a grade below "F"?

In his handling of the Rambus v Infineon patent infringement case Judge Payne has demonstrated for following. - Extreme bias for clients of McGuire Woods where he was a partner previous to his appointment to the Federal Bench.

Read the complete comments at Court House Forum linked here.

View the survey results at Court House Forum linked here.

Song of the day

"Take It Like A Man" (Unlike Croaker)

by Roomful Of Blues

Roomful Of Blues -- The First Album

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Why Hynix Will Lose The Evidentiary Hearing . . . Guest Analysis By James Kelley, Ph.D.

November 11, 2005

Copyright 2005, Kelley and Associates, LLC, All rights Reserved

(Posted on Treowth with permission of the author. Format revised for posting.)

****
PREFACE
This is an attempt to predict the verdict in the HYNIX versus RAMBUS Evidentiary Hearing and to give the reasons for that verdict. The author is not an attorney and is not an investment advisor and the use of this information should be measured against other sources and expert opinion.

It is possible that Judge Whyte may find some other legal standard to measure RAMBUS conduct against. (I personally believe that is not likely but there is nonetheless always the possibility.) In view of what happened in Judge Payne’s court in 2004 there is always the possibility of an unexpected outcome. So be very careful!

By accepting and reading this report you are acknowledging full responsibility for all your own investment decisions.

This document has drawn on the RAMBUS and HYNIX “findings of fact” and also the legal briefs which were filed with the court prior to the beginning of the Evidentiary Bench trial as well as the detailed notes of the Evidentiary Hearing.

If you wish more detail there is 156 page document that has the detail of the Judge Whyte Evidentiary Hearings.

This can be purchased for a modest sum at

rblegalreport@sbcglobal.net

This material is copyrighted to limit the distribution and while discussion of this material is encouraged topically copying material from the report for public dissemination is not allowed for good reasons.

Thank you and good luck!

(Page 1)

****

Table of Contents

PREFACE. 2
INTRODUCTION.. 3
The HYNIX CHARGES. 4
THE EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL DEFENSE. 5
SUMMARY OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL EVIDENCE: 8
AN EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL VERDICT: 8
THE SPOLIATION/UNCLEAN HANDS DEFENSE. 9
HYNIX MUST PROVE THE FOLLOWING: 9
THE CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE COURT: 9
WHEN DID RAMBUS DUTY TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE BEGIN?. 9
DID RAMBUS WILLFULLY AND INTENTIONALLY DESTROY EVIDENCE?. 11
THE HYNIX NEXUS. 11
SUMMARY of UNCLEAN HANDS PROOF: 13
AN UNCLEAN HANDS VERDICT: 13

(Page 2)

****

INTRODUCTION
Hynix has painted a picture of Rambus as a company intent on litigating its non-compatible patent portfolio starting as far back as 1993. The scope of inquiry in this trial has largely been limited to the 1998, 1999 and early 2000 period by Judge Whyte.

This is the period in which Rambus first started up its patent licensing program for SDRAM. It is important to keep in mind that there were no commercial parts available for DDR or GDR during this period and SDRAM was just becoming available commercially. It is also important to keep in mind that RAMBUS only had a couple of non-compatible patents issued in 1998 and these patents were not considered strong enough on which to base a licensing program. It was not until the later half of 1999 that Rambus patent portfolio was strong enough to be used in a licensing program. Finally, it is important also to remember that RAMBUS at this time was focusing most of its engineering resources on the launch of Direct RDRAM, which had been chosen as the PC platform main memory by INTEL in the later part of 1996.

This charges against Rambus are that it destroyed not just documents but actually destroyed evidence related to prior art on the patents, that it destroyed emails essential to Hynix’s defense, that it negotiated in bad faith and that its employees lied under oath.

Hynix is claiming that Rambus document destruction has “prejudiced” their ability to defend themselves not only in this “spoliation” hearing but also in the infringement trial

This picture Hynix is drawing is at odds with commonsense. At the time, Rambus believed that their success was assured with the launch of Direct RDRAM on the Intel PC platform. There was no need to license SDRAM, etc if RDRAM was a success.

Moreover, a small (150 person) company would not attempt to manipulate, trick or defraud a 25 billion dollar DRAM industry. It defies common sense. Anyone of those companies has more lawyers than RAMBUS has employees. Yet this is exactly what Hynix is claiming. They are claiming that Karp was the mastermind of all this and that he kept his lawyers in the dark about his plans. Last year it was Dan Johnson and Karp masterminding this scheme.

(The HYNIX “conspiracy theory” was severely weakened by the HYNIX attorneys’ admission to Judge Whyte that they did not see anything wrong with Daniel Johnson’s advice to RAMBUS regarding a document retention program.)

(Page 3)

****

Throughout this hearing there has been an attempt on the part of HYNIX attorneys to “smear” RAMBUS witnesses like Mr. Tate, Mr. Crisp, Mr. Karp, Mr. Steinberg, Mr. Vincent, and even Mr. Johnson. The purpose of the “smear” is to get RAMBUS testimony discounted in favor of HYNIX. While this strategy worked in Judge Payne’s court, it is known that Judge Whyte does not like this sort of defense. It seems to work against HYNIX throughout this hearing.

THE HYNIX CHARGES
Hynix is making two broad defenses to the patent infringement charges against it as follow:
A) Rambus knew that they might be barred by equitable estoppel and

B) Rambus destroyed documents before its planned litigation against the DRAM manufacturers to obstruct their defenses.

These broad defenses will be addressed one at a time.

Of the two defenses (B) the so-called SPOLIATION/UNCLEAN HANDS defense must be taken very seriously because Judge Payne has ruled from the bench that RAMBUS “spoliated” and barred them from enforcing the patents in suit in his court after a three-day bench trial in 2004. The 2004 spoliation case was based on a “conspiracy theory” which had Dan Johnson and Joel Karp masterminding the destruction of evidence as they planned to sue the DRAM manufacturers.

This year HYNIX has dropped Dan Johnson as one of the masterminds and has left Joel Karp as the sole mastermind.

THE EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL DEFENSE
To prevail with this equitable estoppel defense HYNIX must prove that RAMBUS intentionally misled JEDEC and others into thinking that RAMBUS would not enforce their patents.

RAMBUS had no duty to inform anyone of their patent applications as a practical business matter and of course, actual patents are documents that inform the public.

HYNIX cannot prove this because all the memory manufacturers were already on notice of RAMBUS patents and the likelihood that those patents would eventually obtain broad coverage and the CAFC has already ruled that RAMBUS had no patents that read on the JEDEC standard while at JEDEC. Also, RAMBUS responded to competitive threats by directly warning them of possible patent infringement.

Specifically the first HYNIX “broad finding” is as follows:

A) RAMBUS was on notice that JEDEC members were likely to assert that its failure to disclose it IP claims barred enforcement of its patents against JEDEC standard SDRAM.

This is the shorter and easier of the two broad findings of fact. This concerns the equitable estoppel issue.

The sub heading here is as follow:

(Page 4)

****

1) Between 1992 and 1997, Rambus employees and executives were repeatedly informed by Rambus’s in-house and outside counsel that Rambus’s participation in JEDEC could be the focal point of an equitable estoppel defense in future patent litigations.

To support this line of argument Hynix cites the following exhibits:

HTX-216 Rambus privilege log 9/23/1995

HTX-002 Tate email re: JEDEC/Gordon

HTX-066 Crisp email to Diepenbrock and EXEC re: SyncLink (9/23/1995)

HTX-073 Letter from Vincent to Diepenbrock re: the FTC DELL consent Decree 12/19/1995
Vincent’s July12, 2001 Deposition by Micron

HTX-021 Handwritten notes by Vincent 1992

HTX-077 Handwritten notes by Vincent 1/11/1996

DEP Vincent’s April 12, 2001 Deposition by Infineon

DEP Vincent Infineon Deposition (3/14/2001)

HTX-078 Crisp Email to Tate re: avoidance of equitable estoppel (1/22/96)

DEP Vincent 4/11/2001 Infineon deposition

HTX-225 Crisp email to Mooring re: informing infringers

For this analysis, I will first select the relevant equitable estoppel selections from the evidentiary hearing in Judge Whyte’s court so that the reader can form his own opinion about this Hynix “finding of fact”. Next I will summarize what conclusions I think can be drawn from the evidence. Finally, I will give my “verdict” of whether this Fact was proved in court.

Evidence brought forth during Judge Whyte’s hearing:

Vincent’s testimony regarding Equitable Estoppel:

Vincent clarified the equitable estoppel issues, which he instructed Rambus.

Basically, if you say you will not enforce your patents and later you come back and attempt to enforce them you will face the strongest case of Equitable Estoppel. It is less clear when you remain silent and it is best not to vote at JEDEC.

(Rambus followed this advice they remained silent and did not vote at JEDEC.)
(Mr. Tate testified that in his visits to manufacturers he warned them that they might step on RAMBUS patents.)

(Page 5)

****

Vincent: “having trouble remembering what I said.” There could have been an equitable estoppel if Rambus had led JEDEC members into believing that they would not enforce their patent rights.

There is a discussion of downside risk versus upside potential. The risk as that someone might raise the equitable estoppel issue in the future. (I assume the upside could be the adoption of the RDRAM as a standard by JEDEC).

Lynch: At some point you developed a concern about equitable estoppel issues being raised concerning JEDEC membership and you advised Rambus not to participate. Did you participate in a telephone interview with Mr. Sikorsky, Mr. Pendarvis and Ms. ?
Vincent: I don’t recall. He can remember only Mr. Sikorsky.
At some point the DELL decision was discussed. Mr. Vincent does not recall whether the notes were made at the meeting or later.

(The DELL FTC issue resulted in a DELL patent becoming unenforceable because DELL remained silent during the standardization process. This case caused RAMBUS some concern but RAMBUS had no patents that READ ON JEDEC standards at the time.)

Vincent is not sure whether he advised them at that meeting or merely made some notes about the issue.

Vincent considered Mr. Crisp to be an engineer at Rambus.

Mr. Vincent does not recall the specific subject matter of the claims questions asked him by the engineers.

Mr. Karp asked him in April 1999 to purge his documents pursuant to the DRP.

Mr. Vincent testified that did not remember discussing any claims specifically directed at SDRAM. He remembered discussing the subject matter of the patents with the engineers. These discussions centered on specific features. The patent specifications were very long. He kept notes of those meetings.

Richard Crisp on Equitable Estoppel:
HTX-085 Whether to stop going to JEDEC Meetings (12/1992)

Email between Mooring and Crisp. Regarding equitable estoppel issue with respect to JEDEC.

Mr. Weed of Branson and Branson states that perhaps JEDEC requires patent disclosures but this is inadvisable.

(Page 6)

****

Mr. Crisp believes that he had a conversation with Lester Vincent in which Vincent told him patent disclosures were not required. (The CAFC ruled that this was the case.)

The testimony of Richard Crisp painted a picture of the time period between 1992 and the time he left the company. It reflects his concerns with attendance at JEDEC meeting and possible equitable estoppel issues. The company apparently got several different kinds of opinions on whether to continue at JEDEC or drop out it. Rambus appears to have followed the advice of Lester Vincent at Blakely Sokoloff in that it refused to comment on its patents and refused to cast ballots from 1992 onwards. Rambus had been unsuccessful in getting JEDEC to even let them propose RDRAM as a standard.
Rambus dropped out of JEDEC in late 1995 about the time the SyncLink competition was developing to attack RDRAM.

By 1994 Rambus was becoming acutely aware of the “copy cat” problems and was becoming interested in extending their patents to cover what they thought to be proposed products that would infringe properly drawn patents on their intellectual property. Unfortunately, Rambus was naïve about the difficulty of extending its patent coverage. They actually did not achieve coverage until 1998 almost 4-5 years later. Even then the 1998 patents turned out to be to poorly drawn so that they did not read strongly on SDRAM.

SUMMARY OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL EVIDENCE:
It seems clear from the evidence that Rambus attorney Vincent had some concern about Rambus attending JEDEC meeting in 1992-1993. Rambus mistakenly thought its RDRAM patent might cover works being done at JEDEC on SDRAM. This last fact was noted in the CAFC ruling. Specifically, they were not sure whether they had to disclose patents and patent applications to JEDEC.

Gordon Kelley who was the chairman at that time of JEDEC cleared up this matter inadvertently when he said that IBM would not disclose patents or patent applications that might read on JEDEC devices as a matter of policy.

Rambus appears to have followed Vincent’s advice without further concern. Then in late 1995 the FTC DELL decision came down and it placed a burden on a patent holder to reveal his patent if it read on a standard. Rambus had no patent that read on the standard at that time. A decision was made to not attend any more JEDEC meetings. Rambus paid no renewal fees on its JEDEC membership after that.

(Page 7)

****

The equitable estoppel issue came up in connection with a startup firm MOSYS which was formed by two former RAMBUS engineers and which was selling a product that looked like RDRAM. RAMBUS talked with this company and eventually licensed them.

The equitable estoppel issue surfaced once more in connection with SyncLink and the SLDRAM Consortium that was attempting to develop a competitor to RDRAM.

RAMBUS felt that it had to inform them of a probable infringement problem.

RAMBUS did inform them and there was a scandal relating to the Townsend and Townsend Law Firm that was representing Hyundai, the SLDRAM Consortium and RAMBUS all at the same time. Townsend and Townsend dropped the Consortium. The Consortium ultimately abandoned SLDRAM after being informed by Rambus that it would probably infringe. RAMBUS fired Townsend and Townsend. Townsend and Townsend still represents Hynix the successor company to Hyundai.

There was no further concern about equitable estoppel issues until the Hitachi and Hynix lawsuits in the year 2000.

AN EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL VERDICT:
Equitable estoppel is out of this case as a real issue.

The JEDEC equitable estoppel issues were addressed by the CAFC when it determined that RAMBUS had no duty to reveal either patents or patent applications to JEDEC. All other equitable estoppel issues were directly addressed by RAMBUS, i.e., MOSYS, SYNCLINK, and DELL. The record shows that RAMBUS had no further concerns about equitable estoppel issues for 4 years until the lawsuits which began in 2000.

One of the consequences of the loss of the equitable estoppel issue is that Rambus had no legal duty to preserve documents in connection with any of these equitable estoppel issues raised by Hynix. However, RAMBUS did preserve the documents anyway.

THE SPOLIATION/UNCLEAN HANDS DEFENSE
This issue divides itself into what Hynix has to prove and what the Judge has to decide. None of the witnesses gave any credible evidence of actual intentional and willful destruction of material evidence that could have been of any use to HYNIX in defending itself from patent infringement charges.

HYNIX MUST PROVE THE FOLLOWING:
1) RAMBUS failed to preserve evidence when it had a duty to retain evidence.

2) RAMBUS willfully and intentionally destroyed evidence.

3) The evidence destroyed was relevant and material.

4) RAMBUS conduct has prejudiced RAMBUS ability to defend itself in the current patent infringement suit.

(Page 8)

****

THE CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR THE COURT:
1) When did RAMBUS duty to preserve documents begin?

2) Did RAMBUS willfully and intentionally destroy documents?

3) Was the evidence allegedly destroyed material and relevant to the patent infringement suit?

4) Has RAMBUS’ conduct prejudiced HYNIX’s ability to defend itself?

WHEN DID RAMBUS DUTY TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE BEGIN?
Hynix has taken the position that RAMBUS duty to preserve documents began at least 18 months before RAMBUS entered into litigation with Hitachi on the non-RDRAM patents. HYNIX in its case law references has claimed that the duty to preserve evidence begins at one of the following times:

When litigation begins;

When litigation could (reasonably) potentially happen; or

When litigation is anticipated.

HYNIX is arguing that RAMBUS was planning an aggressive litigation program at the beginning of 1998. Thus they are stating that RAMBUS had a duty to preserve relevant evidence at least to the beginning of 1998. Elsewhere they are arguing that this duty goes back to 1988.

(Page 9)

****

RAMBUS has adopted the more clear standard put forth by the American Bar Association in the year 1999. This standard presumably governed the actions of lawyers across the nation during that time period.

When litigation has commenced .

When litigation is not only anticipated but probable.

It is clear that RAMBUS followed the ABA standard.

By this standard, RAMBUS would have set the duty to preserve data in the time frame of November or December of 1999. Arguably, the date could have been set to October of 1999 when the board of directors approved the licensing program for Hitachi but Stone would argue that Hitachi could have settled and therefore a lawsuit was not probable at that time.

In any event there is no specific evidence that anything material to the patent infringement case that was destroyed during those three months. It is also clear that all the attorneys were acting as though the commencement of litigation was the time to put a “litigation hold” on the document retention program.

Rambus has presented a persuasive argument that the SDRAM, DDR patent licensing program was a backup plan to the RDRAM program with INTEL. If RDRAM had been successful that the SDRAM and DDR patent licensing program would have been unnecessary. During the timeframe of 1998 there was no solid reason to believe that RDRAM would not be successful.

HYNIX has tried to prove that RAMBUS was intending to initiate litigatation by charging very high royalties on SDRAM and DDR. HYNIX claims that RAMBUS was intending to charge 5% on these competing technologies.

In fact, this never happened during the HITACHI litigation. HYNIX failed to prove this assertion. RAMBUS never discussed its royalty rate with Hitachi at the first and final meeting before litigation. (In fact, SDRAM licenses are about .75% and DDR is well under 5% for
non-litigious licensees.)

DID RAMBUS WILLFULLY AND INTENTIONALLY DESTROY EVIDENCE?
HYNIX is asserting that RAMBUS willfully and intentionally destroyed not only documents but also evidence as part of a conspiracy. They have even implied that the outside lawyers were in on this conspiracy. In particular, Dan Johnson who provided the legal advice for establishing RAMBUS document retention/destruction program in 1998 is asserted to be part of the conspiracy.
HYNIX has taken the difficult position of asserting that document retention programs are perfectly legal but that somehow RAMBUS document retention program was just a smokescreen for destruction of evidence.

In order to prove this HYNIX must show that RAMBUS targeted specific material for document destruction and those targets contained relevant evidence. HYNIX cannot do this because RAMBUS did not target specific categories of documents in its document retention plan and it can be shown that RAMBUS made serious attempts to preserve evidence even when they could have gone undetected in destroying the evidence.

(Page 10

****
Because they cannot point to specific categories of evidence that were destroyed wholesale HYNIX has made much of the destruction of emails at RAMBUS.

The problem with this line of argument is that email was just becoming “discoverable” as evidence in 1998. Johnson advised RAMBUS to include an email policy as part of its document retention program. There was no duty to preserve email until later.

In order, for HYNIX to prove their case they must prove that RAMBUS intentionally destroyed evidence related to the patents in suit. It is not enough for them to show general document destruction. It is not enough for them to attempt to discredit the RAMBUS witness testimony from former hearing and trials. This is called the NEXUS and Judge Whyte has asserted that they must show the NEXUS between what was destroyed and the current patent infringement Lawsuit.

THE HYNIX NEXUS
HYNIX must show that the documents destroyed by RAMBUS are material and relevant to the patent infringement suit.

(I am omitting the JEDEC related document issues as irrelevant to patent infringement issues in this case.)

In order to make their case HYNIX attempted to use Theodore Brown a Townsend and Townsend lawyer and also a partner in the firm as an “expert witness”. Judge Whyte did not allow this as he said it would be “unseemly” to allow him to testify in that way. Mr. Brown was allowed only as a “fact witness”. HYNIX protested because Mr. Brown was the only “expert witness” in support of their Unclean Hands defense.

Judge Whyte ruled that Mr. Brown was a “biased” witness after Mr. Stone established his animus towards RAMBUS that grew out of Townsend and Townsend scandal in 1996 and 1997.

Mr. Stone caught Mr. Brown in one lie after another during cross-examination.

Mr. Brown listed the following as missing from RAMBUS patent related document production:
1) No patent related documents prior to 1990 were found in the document production.

2) No agreement between Farmwald and MIPS were found.

3) No agreement between the University of Illinois and Farmwald was found.

(Page 11)

****

4) A missing Farmwald notebook prior to 1990.

5) A 240-page gap in document production regarding the patents.

6) Mr. Moniz spreadsheet cross-referencing prior art with Rambus patents is missing.

7) Rambus used vendor supplied prior art in their production to HYNIX. HYNIX refers to this as “Salting the Prior Art production”.

8) “307 patent was not referenced by Rambus in its other patents.
(Brown was implying that RAMBUS committed fraud on the patent office by not disclosing the ‘307)

Mr. Stone eliminated 1 by showing Mr. Brown a “Spice” circuit simulation from Stanford dated prior to 1990 in the document production. Mr. Brown had testified there were none. Mr. Brown retorted that that was just “one example”. Mr. Stone called his bluff by stating that he had “more in the box”.

The issue of Farmwald’s employment at MIPS is not relevant to the validity of RAMBUS patents. Concepts are not patentable and it took Dr. Farmwald another two years to reduce his concept to the form of an invention. If in fact, this were a real issue, MIPS would rush in to assert its rights. Thus 2 is eliminated.

Mr. Stone produced the agreement between University of Illinois and Farmwald in which the University agreed not to assert patent rights over Farmwald’s inventions eliminating 3. Mr. Stone then asked Mr. Brown if he had done discovery of the University of Illinois. He said yes.

Mr. Stone also showed a page out of Farmwald’s inventor’s notebook that disposed of 4. When Mr. Brown retorted that it was just “one page” Mr. Stone said, “I have more in the box”. Mr. Brown acquiesced.

Mr. Stone then showed how HYNIX had come up with the 240-missing page gap in the document production. The documents were there. Again, Mr. Brown’s testimony was false.

Mr. Moniz spreadsheet was left on his old employer’s computer when he moved to RAMBUS in California. This is hardly a willful act and the cross-references are contained in the patents themselves so what is the problem? This disposes of 6.

The use of vendor supplied prior art is not a problem since as Mr. Stone pointed out “prior art always come from somewhere else” other than Rambus. It looks like RAMBUS ordered another patent search for production. But Rambus also produced the original prior art files HTX-524. “Prior art” is in the public record. RAMBUS conformed its patent files like other companies. This disposes of 7.

Mr. Stone shows the ‘307 patent being referenced in one of RAMBUS other patents showing that it was not intentionally left out of the prior art produced to the patent office. This disposes of 8.

(Page 12)

****

Every statement of “fact” made by Mr. Brown was discredited with the exception of the Excel spreadsheet that was left on a computer in Virginia. This is a secondary derived document and it cannot be argued that it has any importance in HYNIX defense or that its loss was in anyway “willful” or “intentional”.

SUMMARY of UNCLEAN HANDS PROOF:
HYNIX has failed to prove

1) That RAMBUS willfully and intentionally destroyed evidence.

2) That any of the documents destroyed were material and relevant to the patent infringement suit.

3) That RAMBUS’ conduct in anyway prejudiced HYNIX’s ability to defend itself.

HYNIX has also failed to prove that RAMBUS intended to sue the memory manufacturers beginning in 1998. In fact, litigation was just one of the many possible business decisions.

Thus, the date for “litigation hold” should be placed by the ABA guidelines no earlier than October 1999 if not December of 1999. HYNIX has failed to prove that any relevant or material documents were destroyed between October 1999 and January 2000.

There was no showing that prior to 1999 RAMBUS was under any duty to preserve emails that at that time were just becoming discoverable. It is also clear that the outside attorneys at that time were taking the decision to litigate or actual litigation as the time to place a “litigation hold” of document retention programs.
RAMBUS has shown HYNIX claims of spoliation to be speculative.

AN UNCLEAN HANDS VERDICT:
HYNIX loses the SPOLIATION/UNCLEAN HANDS Case due to a lack of any credible showing of willful or intentional destruction of any relevant and material documents related to the HYNIX defense against patent infringement. HYNIX chief witness was established to be biased and to have testified incorrectly on every major issue save one.

Judge Whyte- in my humble opinion- will use the ABA standard for defining the date of “litigation hold” because it was the standard in 1999.

(Page 13)

Song of the day

Astral Projection Blues

by Jimmie Vaughan

Jimmie Vaughan -- Out There

You have to believe Jimmie "knows Rambus" when you check out a couple of other tracks on the album:

-- (Croaker Is Way) Out There

-- The Ironic Twist

With apologies and a hat tip to FinzToRite - should have been posted 10/21/05.

Quote of the day

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer defeat. - Sun Tzu, The Age of War.

Song of the day

"Strange Affair" by Wishbone Ash

Wishbone Ash -- Strange Affair

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Forrest Gump goes to law school

Attorney John Poswall (Sacramento) tells a story – not merely writes about characters. The book begins and ends at the 30th reunion of the graduating class of ’69 from Boalt Hall, the law school located on the campus of UC Berkeley.

Law students struggle in school, relationships, career choices and finding their place in society. The students become lawyers and the struggles continue. A reader’s journey travels through three decades of success, failure and tragedy. Some of the characters interact with historical figures as they chase success or attempt to make a difference.

I ran into the author at a bookstore hawking his book, The Lawyers: Class of '69, front and center to passersby. Frankly, I expected the book to be a vanity publication with little substance by an incredibly successful lawyer – success describes John Poswall. I was pleasantly surprised.

Early chapters are so well-written that I felt as if I was reliving a nightmare. I was forced to avoid reading too close to sleeping. Later chapters brought introspection - the ‘60’s, making a difference, family and responsibility. Not your typical lawyer book.

Note: The first customer review at Amazaon.com is by the late Congressman Robert T. Matsui, he gave the book five stars – I unreservedly agree.

RMBS - Xbox update

Kevin Krewell, editor in chief of Microprocessor Report claims that a special design of part of the Cell Processor is in Xbox 360. See earlier post here.

Is Rambus inside?

An e-mail to Rambus IR inquiring if Rambus was inside Xbox 360 resulted in no reply. None. Zip.

Ramboids hope that something will be learned when they tune in on Analyst Day on 11/15/05.

An e-mail to Microsoft resulted in a return e-mail less than a day later. The e-mail stated in part "I realize the importance of this issue and will direct you to the correct resource." A telephone number was provided.

I called and a pleasant individual quickly realized that she was not capable of answering my question - I had accidentally selected the wrong number from the menu. Before placing me on hold, she provided me with a telephone number (same number with the correct menu selection) and then flawlessly transferred me.

The second individual listened to my question and then informed me that the information I desired was not available to her yet, but that it should be late next week and to please call back. I was also informed that it should also be available on their website.

Well, I don't know if the information is obtainable from Microsoft next week - or ever, but I do know that their Customer Service employees were pleasant and at least made an effort.

1-800-4MY-XBOX (1-800-469-9269). Menu selection is games & hardware.

Hat tip to Microsoft Customer Service.

Song of the day

"Throw Down The Sword"

by Wishbone Ash

Wishbone Ash -- Argus

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Don't steal from Rambus

A reader can almost hear the glee echoing from Julie O'Shea's keyboard as she typed:

Rambus Inc. is like a litigation magnet.

Read her article Rambus: Spending a Lot of Time in Court found at Law.com here.

Notable quote:

Despite additional media requests to see the documents, Kramer sternly replied: "I can't just unseal records, and I can't give legal advice. Sealed records are sealed." Pausing, he then added, "Thank you for your interest."

Hat tip FinzToRite for the Link.

Rambus Analyst Day

When: Tuesday, November 15, 200510:30 AM – 1:30 PM

Where: New York, NY

Rambus, a leading provider of high-speed interface technology, will host an Analyst Day on November 15th, 2005.

During this event, corporate management will provide attendees with a strategic and financial overview of Rambus. In addition to presentations, the conference will also afford investors the opportunity to meet senior members of Rambus’s management team.

The agenda is full, including:

Robert Eulau, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer - Introduction

Harold Hughes, Chief Executive Officer -Strategic Overview

Laura Stark, Vice President, Platform Solutions Group - Product Overview

Kent Richardson, Vice President, Intellectual Property - Patent Position

John Danforth, Senior Vice President and General Counsel - Legal Update

Robert Eulau, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer - Financial Overview

There will be a live Webcast. View the agenda, presenters and pre-register for the Webcast here.

You Be The Judge™

Does anybody care what you think about a particular judge? Apparently, The Courthouse Forum™ does.

CourthouseForum.com is a place where attorneys, litigants, the public and judiciary may freely and candidly post and discuss information and opinions about the nation's courts, judiciary and cases. Please read our Terms and Conditions, Rules and Guidelines, Anonymity Policy, and Privacy Policy, before using the forums.

Here is a link to the Frequently Asked Questions page.

Here is a link to Judge Robert E. Payne's page.

Here is a link to Judge Ronald M. Whyte's page.

Song of the day

A song dedicated to the green one?

"21st Century Schizoid Man"

by King Crimson

King Crimson -- In The Court Of The Crimson King

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Cell in Xbox 360?

Well, maybe Cell’s stepsister.

According to Kevin Krewell, editor in chief of the Microprocessor Report “What they did was take part of the design for the cell processor and create something specifically for Microsoft.”

Here’s to hoping the family photos will include Rambus.

Ed Sperling, writing for Electronic News included the Krewell quote in his article announcing that IBM, Toshiba and Sony unveiled (11/9/05) software developer kits for the cell processor. The developer kits are robust.

“This is a do-it-yourself platform for hard-core code writers,” he (Krewell) said. “It takes more than a day to download. It’s still not ready for prime time as an integrated tool environment.”

Read the complete article Electronic News article here.

Hat tip to FinzToRite & Joe for the links.

Song of the day

To celebrate her 35th birthday (as I was informed by JRW this morning)

"Better Days" by Susan Tedeschi

Susan Tedeschi -- Better Days

Submitted by FinzToRite.

Moot it is

Samsung's motion for partial summary judgment is denied as moot - so says the Honorable Robert E. Payne.

Read the order at Rambus.com linked here.

Hat tip to FinzToRite for the link.

Trick or Treat

Crumb!

Halloween is over and the market is swamped with smoke machines and mirrors - Samsung is grabbing them by the truck load.

The Amigos, hiding under the skirts of Samsung, have received an invitation from the Honorable Robert E. Payne to set up a fun house in his court room.

Samsung, thinly disguised as a request for fees and costs, is really on a quest for something in writing from Judge Payne that it might be able to morph into a prevailing party and collateral estoppel.

Please check your candy carefully.

His Honor orders:

1) No more discovery on the issue of spoliation and unclean hands.

2) Rambus v. Infineon record of February - 21 through February 25, 2005, including all testimony and exhibits introduced shall be part of Samsung v. Rambus record.

3) All exhibits offered in Rambus v. Infineon (whether accepted or not), the Final Pretrial Conference transcript shall be part of the Samsung v. Rambus record.

4) Parties to brief on whether this is an "exceptional" case as follows:

11/11/05 Samsung

12/5/05 Rambus

12/9/05 Samsung reply

12/15/05 Rambus reply


On November 22, 2005, Samsung to file its petition for attorney's fees and cost with supporting documentation and its why it is a "prevailing party" and the reasonableness of its fees and costs.

On December 5, 2005, Rambus to file its objections.

By December 9, 2005, Samsung to file its reply.

Read Judge Payne's order at Rambus.com linked here.

USPO - Rambus knocks twice

United States Patent 6,963,956

Barth, et al. November 8, 2005

Apparatus and method for pipelined memory operations

Abstract
A memory device has interface circuitry and a memory core which make up the stages of a pipeline, each stage being a step in a universal sequence associated with the memory core. The memory device has a plurality of operation units such as precharge, sense, read and write, which handle the primitive operations of the memory core to which the operation units are coupled. The memory device further includes a plurality of transport units configured to obtain information from external connections specifying an operation for one of the operation units and to transfer data between the memory core and the external connections. The transport units operate concurrently with the operation units as added stages to the pipeline, thereby creating a memory device which operates at high throughput and with low service times under the memory reference stream of common applications.

Inventors: Barth; Richard M. (Palo Alto, CA); Tsern; Ely K. (Los Altos, CA); Horowitz; Mark A. (Menlo Park, CA); Stark; Donald C. (Los Altos, CA); Hampel; Craig E. (San Jose, CA); Ware; Frederick A. (Los Altos Hills, CA); Dillon; Nancy David (Washington, VA)

Assignee: Rambus Inc. (Los Altos, CA)

Appl. No.: 817781

Filed: April 2, 2004

***

United States Patent 6,963,232

Frans, et al. November 8, 2005

Compensator for leakage through loop filter capacitors in phase-locked loops

Abstract
A loop filter of a compensating phase-locked loop contains capacitors formed from transistors with thin gate oxide dielectric layers. Leakage current leaks through the capacitors. To avoid jitter in the output signal of the phase-locked loop that would otherwise be caused by the leakage current, a leakage compensation circuit is provided. The leakage compensation circuit of a first embodiment replicates the leakage current using a replication capacitor and a current mirror. The voltage across the replication capacitor is proportional to the control voltage of a voltage-controlled oscillator of the compensating phase-locked loop. A second embodiment generates the compensation current by controlling the voltage on the gate of a transistor. The gate voltage depends on charge added and subtracted by a charge pump in addition to the charge pumps in the loop filter. A third embodiment applies a leakage compensation circuit to a delay locked loop.

Inventors: Frans; Yohan (Palo Alto, CA); Nguyen; Nhat M. (San Jose, CA)

Assignee: Rambus, Inc. (Los Altos, CA)

Appl. No.: 638717

Filed: August 11, 2003

Hat tip to FinzToRite for the links.