Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04346/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04346-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

 -1- Final Judgment.DOC 

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. C-06-4346 JF 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

IN RE RAMBUS INC. SECURITIES 

LITIGATION 

 

This Document Relates To: 

 All Actions 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MASTER FILE NO.: C-06-4346 JF 

FINAL JUDGMENT AND 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE 

A hearing having been held on May 14, 2008, before this Court to determine: (1) whether 

the terms and conditions of the Stipulation of Settlement, dated March 4, 2008 (the 

“Stipulation”), between Lead Plaintiff (“Lead Plaintiff”), on behalf of himself and each of the 

Class Members, and Defendants Rambus Inc., Harold Hughes, Mark Horowitz, P. Michael 

Farmwald, Kevin Kennedy, William H. Davidow, Bruce Dunlevie, Charles Geschke, John D. 

Danforth, David Mooring, Geoff Tate, Robert K. Eulau and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

(collectively, “Defendants”), by and through their respective counsel of record, which is 

incorporated herein by reference, are fair, reasonable and adequate for the settlement of all 

claims asserted by the Class Members against the Defendants in the Complaints now pending 

before this Court under the above caption; (2) whether a class should be certified; and 

(3) whether judgment should be entered dismissing the Complaint on the merits and with 

prejudice in favor of the Defendants, and the Released Claims should be released in favor of the 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 178-2 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 1 of 6

**E-filed 5/14/08**

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 188 Filed 05/14/08 Page 1 of 6
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

 -2- Final Judgment.DOC 

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. C-06-4346 JF 

Released Parties, as against all Persons who are Class Members and who have not requested 

exclusion therefrom; 

It appearing that a notice of the hearing substantially in the form approved by the Court 

was mailed to all Class Members reasonably identifiable; 

It appearing that a summary notice of the hearing substantially in the form approved by 

the Court was published in The Wall Street Journal, pursuant to the specifications of the Court; 

It appearing that due notice of the Final Approval Hearing was given in accordance with 

the Preliminary Approval Order entered by the Court on March 12, 2008 (“Preliminary Approval 

Order”); the respective parties having appeared by their attorneys of record; the Court having 

heard and considered evidence in support of the proposed Settlement (as defined in the 

Stipulation); the attorneys for the respective parties having been heard; an opportunity having 

been given to all other persons requesting to be heard in accordance with the Preliminary 

Approval Order; the Court having determined that Notice to the Class (as defined below) 

certified in the Action pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order was adequate and sufficient; 

and the Settlement having been heard and considered by the Court; and 

The Court, having considered all matters submitted to it at the hearing and otherwise 

having determined the fairness and reasonableness of the proposed Settlement of the claims of 

the Class Members against the Defendants. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED THAT: 

1. This Final Judgment and Order incorporates by reference the definitions in the 

Stipulation, and all capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the 

Stipulation. 

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action and underlying 

Actions and over all parties to the Action and Underlying Actions, including all Members of the 

Class. 

3. Each of the provisions of Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure has 

been satisfied and the Action has been properly maintained according to the provisions of 

Rule 23(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Specifically, based on the record in the 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 178-2 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 2 of 6 Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 188 Filed 05/14/08 Page 2 of 6
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

 -3- Final Judgment.DOC 

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. C-06-4346 JF 

Action, this Court expressly and conclusively finds and orders that (a) the Class as defined in the 

Preliminary Approval Order is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, (b) 

there are questions of law and fact common to the Class, (c) the claims or defenses of Lead 

Plaintiff are typical of the claims or defenses of the Class, and (d) the Lead Plaintiff will fairly 

and adequately protect and represent the interests of the Class. Moreover, the Court finds that 

the questions of law or fact common to the members of the Class predominate over any questions 

affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods 

for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. The Action is hereby certified as a class 

action, pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of 

a class of all persons who purchased the securities of Rambus, or sold put options of Rambus, 

between December 4, 2001, and July 18, 2006, inclusive and who were damaged thereby. 

Excluded from the Class are all Defendants, members of the immediate family of each Individual 

Defendant, any entity in which any Defendant has a controlling interest, officers and directors of 

the Company during the Class Period, and the legal representatives, heirs, predecessors, 

successors and assigns of any such excluded party. Also excluded from the Class are all the 

persons and entities listed on Exhibit 1 attached hereto, each of whom timely filed a valid request 

for exclusion from the Class. 

4. The Court hereby finds that the Notice described herein provided the best notice 

practicable under the circumstances. Said Notice provided due and adequate notice of these 

proceedings and the matters set forth herein, including the Settlement and the Plan of Allocation, 

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. Due and adequate 

notice of the proceedings has been given to the Class Members, and a full opportunity has been 

offered to the Class Members to object to the proposed Settlement and to participate in the 

hearing thereon. Due and adequate notice of the Action was also given to members of the Class 

pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order dated March 12, 2008, which provided, inter alia, for 

the Notice of Proposed Settlement to be mailed to all members of the Class who could 

reasonably be identified, and the Court finds that such Notice of Proposed Settlement offered to 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 178-2 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 3 of 6 Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 188 Filed 05/14/08 Page 3 of 6
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

 -4- Final Judgment.DOC 

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. C-06-4346 JF 

members of the Class the opportunity to request to be excluded from the Class, if done so timely 

and properly. Thus, it is hereby determined that all members of the Class who did not elect to 

exclude themselves by written communication postmarked or delivered on or before April 24, 

2008, as required in the Notice of Proposed Settlement and the Preliminary Approval Order are 

bound by this Judgment. 

5. The adequacy of representation by Lead Plaintiff is hereby determined to be 

consistent with the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, due process, 

and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "PSLRA"). 

6. The Settlement is approved as fair, reasonable and adequate, and in the best 

interests of the Class Members. The Stipulation and Settlement are hereby finally approved in 

all respects and the Parties to the Settlement are directed to consummate the Settlement in 

accordance with the terms and provisions of the Stipulation. 

7. The Complaint is hereby dismissed without costs and with prejudice in full and 

final discharge of any and all claims which were or could have been asserted in the Action, as 

against all Defendants. 

8. The Court finds that during the course of the Action, the Lead Plaintiff, the 

Defendants and their respective counsel have at all times complied with the requirements of Rule 

11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

9. Class Members, the successors and assigns of any of them, and anyone claiming 

through or on behalf of any of them, are hereby permanently barred and enjoined from 

instituting, commencing or prosecuting, either directly or in any other capacity, any Released 

Claims against any of the Released Parties. 

10. The Released Claims are hereby ordered as compromised, settled, released, 

discharged and dismissed as to each of the Released Parties on the merits and with prejudice by 

virtue of the proceedings herein and this Judgment. 

11. The Released Parties are hereby permanently barred and enjoined from 

instituting, commencing or prosecuting, either directly or in any other capacity, any claim arising 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 178-2 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 4 of 6 Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 188 Filed 05/14/08 Page 4 of 6
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

 -5- Final Judgment.DOC 

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. C-06-4346 JF 

out of the institution, prosecution or settlement of the Action against the Lead Plaintiff, Class 

Members or their attorneys, except claims relating to the enforcement of the Settlement. 

12. Neither the Stipulation, nor any of its terms and provisions, nor any of the 

negotiations or proceedings connected with it, nor any of the documents or statements referred to 

therein shall be: 

(a) Offered in evidence as proof of liability or a presumption, concession or an 

admission by any of the Released Parties of the truth of any fact alleged or the validity of any 

claim that has been, could have been or in the future might be asserted in the Complaint, or 

otherwise against the Released Parties, or of any purported liability, fault, wrongdoing or 

otherwise of the Released Parties; or 

(b) Offered or received in evidence as proof of a presumption, concession or an 

admission of any purported liability, wrongdoing, fault, misrepresentation or omission in any 

statement, document, report or financial statement heretofore or hereafter issued, filed, approved 

or made by any of the Released Parties or otherwise referred to for any other reason, other than 

for the purpose of and in such proceeding as may be necessary for construing, terminating or 

enforcing the Stipulation; or 

(c) Construed as a concession or an admission that the Lead Plaintiff or the Class 

Members have suffered any damage; or 

(d) Construed as or received in evidence as an admission, concession or 

presumption against Lead Plaintiff or the Class Members, or any of them, that any of their claims 

are without merit or that damages recoverable under the Complaint would not have exceeded the 

Settlement Fund. 

13. However, the Defendants and/or the Released Parties may file the Stipulation 

and/or the Judgment from this Action in any other action that may be brought against them in 

order to support a defense or counterclaim based on principles of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment for or reduction or any theory of claim 

preclusion or issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim.

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 178-2 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 5 of 6 Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 188 Filed 05/14/08 Page 5 of 6
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

 -6- Final Judgment.DOC 

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

CASE NO. C-06-4346 JF 

14. Exclusive jurisdiction is hereby retained over the parties and the Class Members 

for all matters relating to this Litigation, including the administration, interpretation, effectuation 

or enforcement of the Stipulation and this Judgment. 

(a) The finality of this Judgment shall not be affected, in any manner, by rulings 

that the Court may make on the motions for approval of: Lead Plaintiff’s Plan of Allocation; and 

Lead Counsel’s application for an award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses. 

However, Rambus shall have no obligation to make any payment into the Escrow Account 

except as specifically provided in the Stipulation, and there shall be no distribution of any of the 

Settlement Amount to any Class Member until a plan of allocation is finally approved and is 

affirmed on appeal and/or is no longer subject to review by appeal or certiorari, and the time for 

any petition for rehearing, appeal, or review, by certiorari or otherwise, has expired. 

15. In the event that the Settlement does not become effective in accordance with the 

terms of the Stipulation, or the Effective Date does not occur, this 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 Settlement Amount or any portion thereof or 

interest thereon, if previously paid by Rambus, shall be returned in full to Rambus, except for 

such amounts as provided for in the Stipulation. 

16. There is no just reason for delay in the entry of this Judgment and immediate 

entry by the Clerk of the Court is expressly directed pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure. 

Dated: 5/14/08

 

 Jeremy Fogel 

 United States District Court Judge 

Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 178-2 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 6 of 6 Case 5:06-cv-04346-JF Document 188 Filed 05/14/08 Page 6 of 6