HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC. v. RAMBUS INC.

Nos. 2009-1299, 2009-1347.

645 F.3d 1336 (2011)

HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., Hynix Semiconductor America Inc., Hynix Semiconductor U.K. Ltd.; and Hynix Semiconductor Deutschland GMBH, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. RAMBUS INC., Defendant-Cross Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 29, 2011.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Sri Srinivasan , O'Melveny & Myers LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. With him on the brief were Walter Dellinger , Mark S. Davies , Meaghan E.M. VerGow , Kathryn E. Tarbert , Micah W.J. Smith , Loren L. AliKhan ; and Kenneth L. Nissly and Susan Roeder , of Menlo Park, CA. Of counsel on the brief were Theodore G. Brown, III and Julie J. Han , Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP, of Palo Alto, CA.

Richard G. Taranto , Farr & Taranto, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-cross appellant. Of counsel on the brief were Michael J. Schaengold , Patton Boggs LLP, of Washington, DC; and Gregory P. Stone , Fred A. Rowley, Jr. , and Jeffrey Y. Wu , Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, of Los Angeles, CA; and Carter G. Phillips , Rollin A. Ransom , Eric A. Shumsky , Sidley Austin LLP, of Washington, DC. Of counsel were Ryan C. Morris , Eric M. Solovy and Rachel H. Townsend , of Sidley Austin LLP, of Washington, DC; and Mark Remy Yohalem , Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, of Los Angeles, CA.

Robert E. Freitas , Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, of Menlo Park, CA, for amicus curiae Nanya Technology Corporation, et al. With him on the brief were Jason S. Angell and Craig R. Kaufman .

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge LINN, with whom LOURIE and BRYSON, Circuit Judges, join. Concurring-in-part, dissenting-in-part opinion filed by Circuit Judge GAJARSA, with whom NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, joins.


LINN, Circuit Judge.

This patent infringement action concerns Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory ("SDRAM") and Double Data Rate SDRAM memory ("DDR SDRAM"), in standard use in many computers beginning in the 1990s. The district court entered a final judgment of infringement and non-invalidity of claim 33 of Rambus Inc.'s ("Rambus") U.S. Patent No. 6,324,120 ("'120 patent"); claims 32 and 36 of U.S. Patent No. 6,378,020 ("'020 patent"); claims 9, 28, and 40 of...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases