Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page1 of 8

1 K&L GATES LLP Michael J. Bettinger (Bar No. 122196) 2 mike.bettinger@klgates.com Stephen M. Everett (Bar No. 121619) 3 stephen.everett@klgates.com Curt Holbreich (Bar No. 168053) 4 curt.holbreich@klgates.com Elaine Y. Chow (State Bar No. 194063) 5 elaine.chow@klgates.com Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 6 San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 882-8200 7 Fax: (415) 882-8220 8 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 9 Sean Pak (Bar No. 219032) seanpak@quinnemanuel.com 10 Peter A. Klivans (Bar No. 236673) peterklivans@quinnemanuel.com 11 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, California 94111-4788 12 Telephone: (415) 875-6600 Facsimile: (415) 875-6700 13 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & 14 SULLIVAN, LLP Michael D. Powell (Bar No. 202850) 15 mikepowell@quinnemanuel.com 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5 th Floor 16 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Telephone: (650) 801-5000 17 Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 18 Attorneys for Defendants & Counterclaimants STMICROELECTRONICS N.V. and 19 STMICROELECTRONICS INC. 20 21 RAMBUS INC., 22 Plaintiff, 23 vs. 24 STMICROELECTRONICS N.V.; 25 STMICROELECTRONICS INC., 26 27 28
04395.52001/5342563.3

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Thomas D. Pease (admitted pro hac vice) thomaspease@quinnemanuel.com 51 Madison Avenue, 22 nd Floor New York, NY 10010 Telephone: (212) 849-7000 Facsimile: (212) 849-7100 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Robert J. Becher (Bar No. 193431) robertbecher@ quinnemanuel.com 865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 Facsimile: (213) 443-3100

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION CASE NO. C 10-05449 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF STMICROELECTRONICS N.V. AND STMICROELECTRONICS INC. REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS Date: July 11, 2013 Time: 1:30 pm Crtrm.: Courtroom 3, 17th Floor

Defendants.

Case No. C 10-05449 MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page2 of 8

1 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 11, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the

3 matter may be heard before the Honorable Richard Seeborg, United States District Court for the 4 Northern District of California, San Francisco Courthouse, Courtroom 3-17th Floor, 450 Golden 5 Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, defendants STMicroelectronics N.V. and 6 STMicroelectronics Inc. will and hereby do move this Court for an order: (i) holding that it will 7 permit them to introduce testimony from the Micron v. Rambus trial, Case No. 00-792 SLR, and 8 ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-753, and all exhibits referenced in the testimony, into the trial 9 record prior to the unclean hands trial scheduled to commence on August 26, 2013; and (ii) setting 10 a procedure for the submission of exhibits and testimony and any objections thereto. The 11 requested relief would further judicial economy by taking advantage of the fact that testimony has 12 been offered in prior litigations involving Rambus s unclean hands. 13 This motion is based on the following memorandum of points and authorities, the

14 accompanying Declaration of Robert J. Becher in support of Motion of STMicroelectronics N.V. 15 and STMicroelectronics Inc. Requesting Permission to Submit Testimony and Exhibits From Prior 16 Actions, documentary evidence submitted herewith or cited herein, the evidence and argument 17 presented at the hearing on this motion, and all matters of which the Court may take judicial 18 notice. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
04395.52001/5342563.3

Case No. C 10-05449 MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page3 of 8

1 2

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT In scheduling the unclean hands trial, the Court stated: And so I think we should all

3 operate on the notion that we can derive some benefit from other judicial officers having 4 developed a record on this point. And were not starting from scratch in front of me. 1 The 5 Court subsequently set a two day trial and rejected the request of STMicroelectronics Inc. and 6 STMicroelectronics N.V. ( STMicro) for a seven day trial. Mindful of the Court s guidance 7 regarding the duration of the trial, STMicro moves the Court to allow testimony from the Micron 8 v. Rambus case and International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-753--in which 9 Rambus was the complainant and STMicro was a respondent--to be included in the trial record in 10 this action. A two day trial alone does not give STMicro adequate time to fully present its case in 11 keeping with its due process rights. Allowing the submission of prior testimony will save judicial 12 resources while also ensuring that STMicro is able to create a complete record. To ensure there is 13 a procedure for the submission of prior testimony and exhibits, STMicro requests that the Court 14 set a schedule. 15 16 FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Parties Joint Case Management Statements Regarding the Unclean Hands Trial. The

17 parties submitted a Joint Case Management Statement on December 13, 2012 that discussed the 18 unclean hands trial. 2 Rambus proposed a 2 day unclean hands trial. 3 STMicro asserted that: 19 Rambus s proposed duration of just a few days for the trial is inadequate too and is substantially 20 less time than other courts have allocated to trial of the unclean hands defense. 4 STMicro 21 pointed out that: The ITC hearing lasted eight days, during which the ALJ heard testimony from 22 23 24 December 20, 2012 Hearing Transcript, at 25:18-22 (Declaration of Robert J. Becher in support of Motion of STMicroelectronics N.V. and STMicroelectronics Inc. Requesting 26 Permission to Submit Testimony and Exhibits From Prior Actions, dated June 6, 2013 ( Becher Decl.), Exh. A). 2 27 Joint Case Management Statement, dated December 13, 2012 (Becher Decl., Exh. B). 3 Id. at 4. 4 28 Id. at 6. 25
04395.52001/5342563.3

Case No. C 10-05449 -2MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page4 of 8

1 eight witnesses relating to Rambus spoliation of documents. In addition, the Micron unclean 2 hands trial was five days, and the Hynix unclean hands trial was nine days. 5 3 The Court s Statements and Rulings Regarding the Unclean Hands Trial. At the

4 December 20, 2012 hearing, the Court stated: It should be streamlined, where the focus of it is: 5 This is what has already been developed in this record, and we can submit it to you in various 6 forms -- written, video, whatever -- and get it reduced; because I am not going to sit here for 7 another ten days and hear the same issues about spoliation. Is that clear? 6 When STMicro s 8 counsel suggested a seven day trial was appropriate, the Court said it would not hold a trial of that 9 length: I also will read with care what has been presented to other judicial officers, and, indeed, 10 what Courts of Appeal -- the Federal Circuit has weighed in on in various ways; but I have a lot of 11 control over how much time I m going to give you, and you re not going to get seven days.7 12 The Court also said: And so I think we should all operate on the notion that we can derive some 13 benefit from other judicial officers having developed a record on this point. And were not 14 starting from scratch in front of me.8 15 The Court s Scheduling Order. On February 5, 2013, the Court issued its Case

16 Management Scheduling Order. The Court set a two day unclean hands trial to take place on 17 August 26 and August 27, 2013.9 STMicro is simultaneously filing a motion for summary 18 judgment asking this Court to accord collateral estoppel effect to certain findings made by other 19 courts regarding Rambus s unclean hands. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
04395.52001/5342563.3

5 6 7 8 9

Joint Case Management Statement, at 6 n. 2 (Becher Decl., Exh.B). December 20, 2012 Hearing Transcript, at 23:24-24:4 (Becher Decl., Exh. A). Id, at 25:7-11. Id. at 25:18-22. Case Management Scheduling Order, dated February 5, 2013 (Becher Decl., Exh. C).

Case No. C 10-05449 -3MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page5 of 8

1 2 I. 3 4 5 6

ARGUMENT PERMITTING TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM THE DELAWARE TRIAL AND THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION INVESTIGATION NO. 337-TA-753 TO BE ENTERED INTO THE TRIAL RECORD WOULD PROMOTE JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY AND ENSURE A FAIR TRIAL STMicro requests that the Court allow it to offer testimony and exhibits from prior trials

7 into the trial record prior to the start of the trial and set a procedure for the submission of such 8 evidence and any objections thereto. In particular, STMicro requests permission to introduce 9 transcripts and exhibits from the 2009 unclean hands trial before Judge Robinson in Micron v. 10 Rambus, Case No. 00-792 SLR (D. Del.), and the October 2011 hearing before the International 11 Trade Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-753. Establishing such a procedure would be 12 consistent with the guidance the Court has provided to the parties. The Court told the parties 13 repeatedly at the December 20, 2012 hearing that it will read with care what has been presented 14 to other judicial officers and we re not starting from scratch in front of me.10 The Court also 15 stated, It should be streamlined, where the focus of it is: This is what has already been 16 developed in this record, and we can submit it to you in various forms -- written, video, whatever 17 - and get it reduced, because I am not going to sit here for another ten days and hear the same 18 issues about spoliation. 11 Allowing the testimony and exhibits from prior actions to be admitted 19 into the record will ensure the Court has the benefit of the record from the prior actions and will 20 save judicial resources. 21 Moreover, given the Court has set a shorter trial than other courts that have held bench

22 trials regarding Rambus s unclean hands, allowing this additional record to be introduced outside 23 of the two day trial is fair and will ensure that STMicroelectronics right to a fair trial is honored. 24 The Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution of course guarantees [t]he right to a 25 fair trial. Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501, 503 (1976); see In re Murchison , 349 U.S. 133, 136 26 (1955) (A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process.); Mathews v. 27
10

28
04395.52001/5342563.3

11

December 20, 2012 Hearing Transcript, at 25:7-8, 25:21-22 (Becher Decl., Exh. A). Id. at 23:24-24:4.

Case No. C 10-05449 -4MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page6 of 8

1 Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333(1976) (The fundamental requirement of due process is the 2 opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner. ). Meaningful 3 opportunity to present evidence and examine witnesses is integral to this right. See, e.g., 4 Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 489 (1972). To ensure that STMicro s right to a fair trial is 5 honored and that it is able to fully present its defense, the Court should allow the submission of 6 prior testimony in advance of the trial. 7 Accordingly, STMicro proposes that the Court set a schedule for the submission of the

8 testimony and exhibits prior to the upcoming unclean hands trial scheduled to commence on 9 August 26, 2013. STMicro proposes the following schedule: 10 11 12 13 14 15 August 5, 2012: last day to submit testimony and exhibits from the Micron v. Rambus trial, Case No. 00-792 SLR., and ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-753; August 12, 2012: last day for Rambus to file any objections to the submission of testimony and exhibits from the Micron v. Rambus trial, Case No. 00-792 SLR., and ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-753; August 19, 2012: last day to file a response to any objections.

16 This schedule will allow the process to be completed before the upcoming unclean hands trial. 17 18 CONCLUSION For the above reasons, the Court should hold that testimony and exhibits from the Micron

19 v. Rambus action and ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-753 can be admitted into the trial record 20 without counting against the parties trial time and set a procedure for the submission of the 21 testimony and exhibits and objections thereto. 22 23 Dated: 24 25 26 27 28
04395.52001/5342563.3

June 6, 2013

/s/ Michael J. Bettinger Michael J. Bettinger Stephen M. Everett Curt Holbreich Elaine Y. Chow K&L GATES LLP Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel.: (415) 882-8200

Case No. C 10-05449 -5MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page7 of 8

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
04395.52001/5342563.3

Fax: (415) 882-8220 Sean S. Pak Peter Klivans Q UINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 50 California Street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel.: (415) 875-6600 Fax: (415) 875-6700 Robert J. Becher Q UINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 865 S. Figueroa St., 10F Los Angeles, CA 90017 Tel.: (213) 443-3000 Fax: (213) 443-3100 Attorneys for Defendants STMicroelectronics N.V. and STMicroelectronics Inc.

Case No. C 10-05449 -6MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS

Case3:10-cv-05449-RS Document180 Filed06/06/13 Page8 of 8

1 2

E-FILING ATTESTATION I hereby attest that I have on file all holograph signatures for any signatures indicated by a

3 conformed signature (/s/) within this e-filed document. 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

04395.52001/5342563.3

/s/ Peter Klivans Peter Klivans

Case No. C 10-05449 -7MOTION REQUESTING PERMISSION TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS FROM PRIOR ACTIONS