Whyte grants Rambus motion in DDR2 case
On November 24, Rambus won a (small) pretrial ruling in its case in ND Cal, of which Bloomberg had the following text in a Nov. 25 article:
The ruling means Whyte “already found one claim for Rambus that they won’t have to argue,” Jeff Schreiner, an analyst at San Diego-based Capstone Investments who doesn’t own Rambus shares, said today in a phone interview. “It starts to narrow the focus of the trial. You don’t get jurors lost in the complicated nature of the patents.”
Whyte denied Rambus’s request for similar pretrial rulings covering 10 other elements of its patents. Those claims will be argued at the trial covering infringement claims over DDR2, or double rate 2 memory chips, and a newer generation, DDR3, as well as graphics memory. Samsung, Hynix and Micron last year accounted for more than 50 percent of revenue in the dynamic random access memory market, according to Schreiner.
As Rambus moves forward, one sees how confused and off-base Jaffe and Lerner were in "Innovation and its Discontents."
See also
CADC smokes FTC on Rambus; another Jaffe/Lerner argument blown away
**ALSO, one had a blog comment:
Patent lawyer, Lawrence B. Ebert, notes that Rambus won a "small" pretrial ruling this week. I suppose it is small in view of the inevitable, but "big" to the market as Rambus is bouncing up about 20% today.
Mr. Ebert has an ongoing "mine is bigger" discussion with Mike Masnick regarding Mike's alleged reliance on Jaffe and Lerner for his understanding about patent law. Entertaining reading.
The above comment about Jaffe and Lerner, who vilified Rambus in Innovation and Its Discontents, has nothing to do with Masnick. IPBiz has criticized Masnick's lack of understanding of patent law on many grounds, not all of which have to do with Jaffe and Lerner.
Separately, Jaffe and Lerner praised the patent focus of Qualcomm.
The ruling means Whyte “already found one claim for Rambus that they won’t have to argue,” Jeff Schreiner, an analyst at San Diego-based Capstone Investments who doesn’t own Rambus shares, said today in a phone interview. “It starts to narrow the focus of the trial. You don’t get jurors lost in the complicated nature of the patents.”
Whyte denied Rambus’s request for similar pretrial rulings covering 10 other elements of its patents. Those claims will be argued at the trial covering infringement claims over DDR2, or double rate 2 memory chips, and a newer generation, DDR3, as well as graphics memory. Samsung, Hynix and Micron last year accounted for more than 50 percent of revenue in the dynamic random access memory market, according to Schreiner.
As Rambus moves forward, one sees how confused and off-base Jaffe and Lerner were in "Innovation and its Discontents."
See also
CADC smokes FTC on Rambus; another Jaffe/Lerner argument blown away
**ALSO, one had a blog comment:
Patent lawyer, Lawrence B. Ebert, notes that Rambus won a "small" pretrial ruling this week. I suppose it is small in view of the inevitable, but "big" to the market as Rambus is bouncing up about 20% today.
Mr. Ebert has an ongoing "mine is bigger" discussion with Mike Masnick regarding Mike's alleged reliance on Jaffe and Lerner for his understanding about patent law. Entertaining reading.
The above comment about Jaffe and Lerner, who vilified Rambus in Innovation and Its Discontents, has nothing to do with Masnick. IPBiz has criticized Masnick's lack of understanding of patent law on many grounds, not all of which have to do with Jaffe and Lerner.
Separately, Jaffe and Lerner praised the patent focus of Qualcomm.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home