Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-md-01819/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-md-01819-71/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

vLAW OFFICES

COTCHETT, PITRE, &

MCCARTHY

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO THE MICRON DEFENDANTS, Case

No. M:07-cv-1819 CW; MDL No. 1819

Counsel listed on Signature Page

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE STATIC RANDOM ACCESS

MEMORY (SRAM) ANTITRUST

LITIGATION

__________________________________

This Document Relates to:

ALL DIRECT PURCHASER

ACTIONS

__________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Master File No. M:07-cv-01819-CW

MDL No. 1819

FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

WITH PREJUDICE AS TO THE MICRON

DEFENDANTS

Time: 2:00 p.m.

Date: July 1, 2010

Judge: Hon. Claudia Wilken, Courtroom 2

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 1025 Filed 07/02/10 Page 1 of 4
vLAW OFFICES

COTCHETT, PITRE, &

MCCARTHY

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO THE MICRON DEFENDANTS, Case

No. M:07-cv-1819 CW; MDL No. 1819 1

This matter has come before the Court to determine whether there is any cause why this

Court should not approve the settlement with Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron

Semiconductor Products, Inc. Defendants (“Defendants”) set forth in the settlement agreement

(“Settlement”), dated March 17, 2009, relating to the above-captioned litigation, In re Static

Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust Litigation, Case No. M:07-cv-1819 CW (N.D. Cal.)

(“Action”). The Court, after carefully considering all papers filed and proceedings held herein

and otherwise being fully informed in the premises, has determined (1) that the Settlement

should be approved, and (2) that there is no just reason for delay of the entry of this final

Judgment approving the Settlement. Accordingly, the Court directs entry of Judgment which

shall constitute a final adjudication of this case on the merits as to the parties to the Settlement.

Good cause appearing therefor, it is: 

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:

1. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this litigation, and all actions

within this litigation and over the parties to the Settlement, including all members of the Class

and the Defendants.

2. The definitions of terms set forth in the Settlement are incorporated hereby as

though fully set forth in this Judgment.

3. The Court hereby finally approves and confirms the settlement set forth in the

Settlement and finds that said settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable and adequate to the

Class pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

4. The persons/entities identified in the Notice re: Class Notice and Requests for

Exclusion (Dkt. No. 679), filed on April 20, 2009, have timely and validly requested exclusion

from the Class and, therefore, are excluded. Such persons/entities are not included in or bound

by this Final Judgment. Such persons/entities are not entitled to any recovery for the settlement

proceeds obtained through the Settlement.

5. This Court hereby dismisses on the merits and with prejudice the Action, certified

as a class action on September 29, 2008, in favor of each and all of the Defendants, with each

party to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees (subject to any motion to be made by

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 1025 Filed 07/02/10 Page 2 of 4
vLAW OFFICES

COTCHETT, PITRE, &

MCCARTHY

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO THE MICRON DEFENDANTS, Case

No. M:07-cv-1819 CW; MDL No. 1819 2

representative Plaintiff/Class Counsel to seek attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, including expert

fees and costs, and other such items from the Settlement Fund – as provided for in the

Settlement). 

6. All persons and entities who are Releasors are hereby barred and enjoined from

commencing, prosecuting, or continuing any claims, demands, actions, suits, or causes of action,

or otherwise seeking to establish liability, against any Micron Releasee based, in whole or in

part, upon any of the Released Claims or conduct at issue in the Released Claims (as defined and

limited in the Settlement).

7. The Micron Releasees are hereby and forever released and discharged with

respect

to any and all claims, demands, actions, suits, or causes of action which the Releasees had or

have arising out of or related to any of the Released Claims (as defined and limited in the

Settlement).

8. The notice given to the Class of the settlement set forth in the Settlement and

other matters set forth therein was the best notice practicable under the circumstances, including

individual notice to all members of the Class who could be identified through reasonable efforts.

Said notice provided due and adequate notice of the proceedings and of the maters set forth

therein, including the proposed settlement set forth in the Settlement, to all persons entitled to

such notice, and said notice fully satisfied the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure and the requirements of due process. 

9. No Class Member has objected to the Settlement.

10. Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any way, this Court hereby

retains continuing jurisdiction over: (a) implementation of this settlement and any distribution to

Class Members pursuant to further orders of this Court; (b) disposition of the Settlement Fund

(c) hearing and determining applications by representative Plaintiff/Class Counsel for attorneys’

fees, costs, expenses, including expert fees and costs, and other such items; (d) the Class Action

until the final judgements contemplated hereby have become effective and each and every act

agreed to be performed by the parties all have been performed pursuant to the Settlement; (e)

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 1025 Filed 07/02/10 Page 3 of 4
vLAW OFFICES

COTCHETT, PITRE, &

MCCARTHY

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FINAL JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO THE MICRON DEFENDANTS, Case

No. M:07-cv-1819 CW; MDL No. 1819 3

hearing and ruling on any matters relating to the plan of allocation of settlement proceeds; and

(f) all parties to the Class Actions and Releasees for the purpose of enforcing and administering

the Settlement and the mutual releases and other documents contemplated by, or executed in

connection with the Settlement.

12. In the event that the settlement does not become effective in accordance with the

terms of the Settlement, then the judgment shall be rendered null and void and shall be vacated,

and in such event, all orders entered and releases delivered in connection herewith shall be null

and void and the parities shall be returned to their respective positions ex ante. 

13. The Court finds, pursuant to Rules 54(a) and (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, that this Final Judgment should be entered and further finds that there is no just

reason for delay in the entry of this Judgment, as a Final Judgment, as to the parties to the

Settlement. Accordingly, the Clerk is hereby directed to enter Judgment forthwith. 

Date: July 2, 2010 ___________________________________________________

THE HONORABLE CLAUDIA WILKEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Submitted by:

JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (#36324)

jcotchett@cpmlegal.com 

STEVEN N. WILLIAMS (#175489)

swilliams@cpmlegal.com 

NEIL SWARTZBERG (#215133)

nswartzberg@cpmlegal.com 

COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY

San Francisco Airport Office Center

840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200

Burlingame, CA 94010

Telephone: (650) 697-6000

Facsimile: (650) 697-0577

Lead Counsel for the Direct Purchaser Class

Case 4:07-md-01819-CW Document 1025 Filed 07/02/10 Page 4 of 4