Case: 12-1634

Document: 10

Page: 1

Filed: 09/20/2012

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT RAMBUS, INC. V. KAPPOS (Reexamination of 95/001,134) Appeal No. 2012-1634 DOCKETING STATEMENT This Docketing Statement must be completed by all principal counsel and filed with the court within 14 days of the date of docketing. Name of parties you represent Parties are (select one) Rambus, Inc. Appellant/Petitioner Appellees Cross-Appellant Intervenor

Tribunal appealed from and case no. Date of judgment/order June 11, 2012

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, Appeal No. 2012-000171 Type of case Reexamination

Relief sought on appeal

Reversal of decision of PTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences None Decision affirms rejection of claims 1-5, 7,

Relief awarded below (if damages specify)

Briefly describe the judgment/order appealed from

8, 10-12, 14, 26, 28-32, 34, and 35 of Rambuss patent, U.S. Patent No. 6,260,097 as anticipated and obvious. Nature of judgment (select one) Final order, 28 USC 1295 Rule 54(b) Interlocutory order (specify type) Other (explain - see Fed. Cir. R. 28(a)(5))

Case: 12-1634

Document: 10

Page: 2

Filed: 09/20/2012

Name and docket no. of any related cases pending before this court No. 2012-1247

In re Rambus Inc.,

Brief statement of the issues to be raised on appeal 14, 26, 28-32, 34, and 35 of U.S. Patent No. 6,260,097.

Validity of claims 1-5, 7, 8, 10-12,

Have there been discussions with other parties relating to settlement of this case? Yes If yes, when were the last such discussions? Before the case was filed below? During the pendency of the case below? Following the judgment/order appealed from? No

If yes, were the settlement discussions mediated? If they were mediated, by whom?

Yes

No

Do you believe that this case may be amenable to mediation?

Yes

No

If you answered no, explain why not

Rambus, Inc. settled the case with the third party

requester, nVidia Corporation, who is no longer participating in the appeal. The PTO has not indicated any desire to settle.

Provide any other information relevant to the inclusion of this case in the courts pilot mediation program None

Case: 12-1634

Document: 10

Page: 3

Filed: 09/20/2012

I certify that I filed an original and one copy of this Docketing Statement with the Clerk of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and served a copy on counsel of record, this 20th day September, 2012 by email Name of counsel: J. Michael Jakes /s/ J. Michael Jakes Signature of counsel

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, L.L.P. 901 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 408-4000 Fax #: (202) 408-4400 E-mail address: mike.jakes@finnegan.com

Case: 12-1634

Document: 10

Page: 4

Filed: 09/20/2012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Docketing Statement for Rambus Inc. were served upon registered counsel by operation of the Courts CM/ECF system on this 20th day of September, 2012, and by email to counsel not registered with the Courts CM/ECF system. Counsel for the U.S. PTO Raymond T. Chen, Solicitor United States Patent and Trademark Office MDW 8A15 P.O. Box 1450 Mail Stop 8 Alexandria, VA 22213-1450 tasha.gibbs@uspto.gov Counsel for nVidia David L. McCombs Haynes & Boone, LLP 2323 Vicotry Avenue Dallas, TX 75219 david.mccombs@haynesboone.com

/s/ Kay Wylie