DRAM Patent Holder Rambus Called Out (Again) For Shredding Evidence
from the no-evidence-that-destroyed-evidence-was-relevant...-wait,-what? dept
Rambus Inc. is back in the news again as some of its questionable pre-litigation tactics have been highlighted by another company on the receiving end of a patent infringement lawsuit. Rambus Inc. sued SK Hynix and several other chip builders at the beginning of 2000, claiming to hold the rights to certain DRAM technology.Rambus is perhaps best known for a move that took place well over a decade ago, shortly before it went into the innovation-via-litigation business.
On Friday, Whyte found that Rambus destroyed documents when it anticipated litigation. Specifically, Whyte said, Rambus employees were told to destroy documents at annual "shred days," from 1998 to 2000, prior to filing the patent suits."Annual shred days?" The fact that Rambus had not only a periodic event but a nickname for the event should probably be taken as an indication that the "company" needed to rid itself of possibly damning paperwork. It calls to mind something akin to mobsters moving suitcases of cash to their mothers' houses ahead of a RICO investigation.
Because litigation was "reasonably foreseeable," Whyte ruled, Rambus should had preserved the documents.
"Rambus engaged in spoliation of evidence when it engaged in the destruction of documents on all three shred days," the 66-page ruling states.
Now, many companies will annually shred financial documents, personnel files, etc. that have reached the expiration date of federal and state retention requirements. However, what Rambus did hardly sounds like just being tidy, despite its "engineers are messy" defense.
Rambus countered that its engineers tended to be "pack rats" and said that its policy was justified...SK Hynix had brought Rambus' "shredding days" to the attention of the disctrict court back in 2005, claiming that "Rambus had spoliated evidence and that its 'unclean hands' warranted dismissal of 15 infringement claims." This claim was dismissed and in 2011, US District Judge Ronald Whyte ordered SK Hynix to pay $397 million in royalties. On appeal, Whyte reexamined Hynix's claims and found that Rambus had indeed shredded plenty of documents, but possibly nothing relevant.
"The evidence does not show that Rambus knowingly destroyed damaging evidence," Whyte said.He also gave Rambus a bit of a post-facto warning.
"Although the evidence does not support a conclusion that Rambus deliberately shredded documents it knew to be damaging, the court concludes that Rambus nonetheless spoliated evidence in bad faith or at least willfully," he added.
Because litigation was "reasonably foreseeable," Whyte ruled, Rambus should had preserved the documents.Then there's this, in which Whyte states that the litigation might have gone differently if no documents had been shredded.
"Even if none of the destroyed documents would have shed new light on the disclosure obligation, there may have been internal Rambus documents containing information about Rambus' plans to gain market power by using information learned at [Joint Electron Device Engineering Council] JEDEC meetings. Such evidence could have been relevant and given support to Hynix's equitable claims and defenses," Whyte said.Despite all this, SK Hynix is still on the hook for royalties. The $397 million might be reduced, but any reduction would have more to do with royalties Rambus has already collected from other companies, rather than any excessive shredding or the fact that it basically reverse engineered its patents to cover new industry standards. Unfortunately for SK Hynix, the shredding that has already resulted in two Rambus infringement suits being tossed out doesn't seem to be doing much for it.
"The court concludes that Hynix has made a plausible, concrete suggestion that it may have been prejudiced by destruction of JEDEC-related documents, and that Rambus has not overcome this suggestion of prejudice by clear and convincing evidence."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: dram, evidence, patents, shredding, standards
Companies: rambus, sk hynix
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, it's also a case of a U.S. company against a Korean company. Like Apple vs Samsung. It seems a bit that U.S. companies are a bit favored in (U.S.) court. It'll probably would go another way in Korean or Chinese court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@2
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Annual Shred Days
It may well be in the present case the documents that shouldn't have been shredded were reduced to confetti during the prior annual shredding days, but the shredding days themselves is neither here nor there as a point of fact, and hardly indicative of malicious intent on the company's part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annual Shred Days
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annual Shred Days
There's even slew of companies who provide these services. Here's a random one I found off of Google:
http://www.shredit.com/on-site-paper-shredding.aspx
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annual Shred Days
Now, many companies will annually shred financial documents, personnel files, etc. that have reached the expiration date of federal and state retention requirements.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Annual Shred Days
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IE: A record of the documents disposed of and approvals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re
visit my link
[ link to this | view in chronology ]