Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-02298/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-02298-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ORDER OVERRULING SAMSUNG'S OBJECTIONS TO MOSAID PRODUCTION ORDER—C-05-00334; C-05-02298 RMW

TSF

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-filed: 11/13/07 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

RAMBUS INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,

INC., SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, INC.,

SAMSUNG AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR,

L.P.,

Defendants.

No. C-05-02298 RMW

ORDER OVERRULING SAMSUNG'S

OBJECTIONS TO MOSAID PRODUCTION

ORDER

[Re Docket No. 351]

RAMBUS INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., HYNIX

SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC.,

HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR

MANUFACTURING AMERICA INC., 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,

INC., SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, INC.,

SAMSUNG AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR,

L.P., 

NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION,

NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION

U.S.A.,

Defendants.

No. C-05-00334 RMW

[Re Docket No. 498]

Case 5:05-cv-02298-RMW Document 536 Filed 11/13/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 "Samsung" collectively refers to all of the Samsung entities sued in these cases, namely

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., and

Samsung Austin Semiconductor, L.P.

2 The court believes this reflects the scope of Judge Ambler's order. To the extent Judge

Ambler's order could be construed as broader than this formulation, the order is modified to conform

to these limits.

ORDER OVERRULING SAMSUNG'S OBJECTIONS TO MOSAID PRODUCTION ORDER—C-05-00334; C-05-02298 RMW

TSF 2

Samsung1 objects to a Special Master's order granting Rambus' motion to compel Samsung to

produce documents relating to Samsung's destruction of documents in Mosaid Technologies, Inc. v.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Case No. 01-CV-4340 (D.N.J.). Rambus opposes the objection. The

court has reviewed the papers and considered the arguments of counsel heard on November 7, 2007. 

The court overrules Samsung's objections to the Mosaid production. Samsung is ordered to produce

everything from Mosaid Technologies, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Case No. 01-CV-4340

(D.N.J.) that specifically, or in part specifically, addresses the destruction or spoliation of evidence.2

The court envisions that this production will comprise court filings, discovery productions, hearing

transcripts and deposition transcripts, but it is not limited to particular classes of documents. To be

clear, Samsung does not have to produce everything from the Mosaid litigation. This order is

limited to those things that specifically, or in part specifically, address the destruction or spoliation

of evidence.

DATED: 11/13/07 

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:05-cv-02298-RMW Document 536 Filed 11/13/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ORDER OVERRULING SAMSUNG'S OBJECTIONS TO MOSAID PRODUCTION ORDER—C-05-00334; C-05-02298 RMW

TSF 3

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to:

Counsel for Plaintiff(s):

Craig N. Tolliver ctolliver@mckoolsmith.com 

Pierre J. Hubert phubert@mckoolsmith.com 

Brian K. Erickson berickson@dbllp.com, 

David C. Vondle dvondle@akingump.com 

Gregory P. Stone gregory.stone@mto.com 

Carolyn Hoecker Luedtke luedtkech@mto.com 

Peter A. Detre detrepa@mto.com 

Burton Alexander Gross burton.gross@mto.com, 

Steven McCall Perry steven.perry@mto.com

Jeannine Y. Sano sanoj@howrey.com 

Counsel for Defendant(s):

Matthew D. Powers matthew.powers@weil.com 

David J. Healey david.healey@weil.com 

Edward R. Reines Edward.Reines@weil.com

John D Beynon john.beynon@weil.com

Jared Bobrow jared.bobrow@weil.com

Leeron Kalay leeron.kalay@weil.com

Theodore G. Brown, III tgbrown@townsend.com

Daniel J. Furniss djfurniss@townsend.com

Jordan Trent Jones jtjones@townsend.com

Kenneth L. Nissly kennissly@thelenreid.com 

Geoffrey H. Yost gyost@thelenreid.com 

Susan Gregory van Keulen svankeulen@thelenreid.com

Patrick Lynch plynch@omm.com 

Jason Sheffield Angell jangell@orrick.com

Vickie L. Feeman vfeeman@orrick.com

Mark Shean mshean@orrick.com 

Kai Tseng hlee@orrick.com

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not

registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.

Dated: 11/13/07 TSF

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:05-cv-02298-RMW Document 536 Filed 11/13/07 Page 3 of 3