2133 1

Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2133 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 1 of 7
1 GREGORY P. STONE (SBN 078329) ROLLIN A. RANSOM (SBN 196126)

STEVEN M. PERRY (SBN 106154) Sidley Austin LLP
2 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 555 West Fifth Street, Suite 4000
355 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90013-1010
3 Thirty-Fifth Floor Telephone: (213) 896-6000
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560 Facsimile: (213) 896-6600
4 Telephone: (213) 683-9100 Email: rransom@sidley.com
Facsimile: (213) 687-3702
5 Email: gregory.stone@mto.com; PIERRE J. HUBERT (admitted pro hac vice)
steven.perry@mto.com
CRAIG N. TOLLIVER (admitted pro hac vice)
6
PETER A. DETRE (SBN 182619) McKool Smith P.C.
7 CAROLYN HOECKER LUEDTKE (SBN 207976) 300 West 6th Street, Suite 1700
Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP Austin, TX 78701
8 560 Mission Street, 27th Floor Telephone: (512) 692-8700
San Francisco, CA 94105 Facsimile: (512) 692-8744
9 Telephone: (415) 512-4000 Email: phubert@mckoolsmith.com;
Facsimile: (415) 512-4077 ctolliver@mckoolsmith.com
10 Email: peter.detre@mto.com;
carolyn.luedtke@mto.com
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION • ATTORNEYS
RAMBUS INC.
12
13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MCKOOL SMITH
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DALLAS, TEXAS
14 SAN JOSE DIVISION
15
16 RAMBUS INC., ) Case No. C 05-00334 RMW

)
17 Plaintiff, ) RAMBUS INC.’S MOTION TO
COMPEL DEPOSITION OF NANYA
) 30(B)(6) DESIGNEES ON CERTAIN
18 vs.
) DDR3 SDRAM TOPICS
19 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., HYNIX )
SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC., ) Date: October 2, 2008
20 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR ) Time: 9:00 am
MANUFACTURING AMERICA INC., ) Before: Hon. Read Ambler (Ret.)
21 ) Place: JAMS - San Jose (telephonic)
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., )
22 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
INC., SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., )
23 SAMSUNG AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR, )
L.P., )
24 )
NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, )
25 NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION )
U.S.A.,
)
26 )
Defendants.
27
28
Rambus Inc.’s Motion to Compel deposition of Nanya 30(b)(6) designees on certain DDR3 SDRAM topics
Case No. CV 05-00334
Austin 45778v35
1 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., HYNIX )

SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC., )
2 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR )
MANUFACTURING AMERICA INC.,
HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR U.K. LTD., )
3
HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR )
4 DEUTSCHLAND GmbH, )
)
5 Counterclaim Plaintiffs, )
v. )
6 )
RAMBUS INC., )
7
Counterdefendant. )
8 ______________________________________ )
10
11
12
13
MCKOOL SMITH
DALLAS, TEXAS
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Austin 45778v3
1 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
2 TO DEFENDANTS NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION AND NANYA

3
TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION U.S.A. (collectively, hereinafter “Nanya”), ALL PARTIES
4
AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
5
6 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 10, 2008, at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as this
7
matter may be heard, Plaintiff Rambus, Inc. (“Rambus”) will and hereby does move, pursuant to
8
Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 37, for an order compelling
9
Nanya to provide one or more corporate designees to testify with on Topics 1-11 set forth in
10
Rambus’s Notice of Deposition of Nanya pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil
11
12 Procedure, dated June 29, 2007, with respect to Nanya’s DDR3 SDRAM products within five
13
MCKOOL SMITH
business days of the Court’s order.

DALLAS, TEXAS
14
15 Rambus’s motion is based upon this Notice of Motion and Motion, the attached Memorandum of
16 Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Pierre Hubert filed herewith, all of the pleadings filed
17 in this action, and upon such further written argument as may be received by the Court.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Austin 45778v3
1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
2
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
3
On June 29, 2007 Rambus, Inc. (“Rambus”) served its Notice of Deposition of Nanya
4
pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, setting forth eleven topics
5
6 related to Nanya DRAM products. (See Hubert Decl., ¶ 2 and Ex. A.) Rambus received
7 Nanya’s recent production of over four hundred thousand pages of documents, including many
8 documents related to its DDR3 SDRAM (“DDR3”) products, on August 8, 2008, and re-noticed
9
its deposition with respect to Nanya’s DDR3 products on August 20, 2008. (See Hubert Decl., ¶
10
3 and Ex. B.) In response, Nanya refused to designate a corporate witness, stating that a 30(b)(6)
11
witness, Mr. Willie Liu, had already been provided with respect to DDR3. (See Hubert Decl., ¶
12
4 and Ex. C.) However, it is clear from the objections by counsel for Nanya during the
13
MCKOOL SMITH
DALLAS, TEXAS
14 deposition that Mr. Liu did not act as a 30(b)(6) witness for Nanya with respect to DDR3.
15 Furthermore, Mr. Liu had only limited personal knowledge as to the eleven topics identified in
16 Rambus’s deposition notice with respect to Nanya’s DDR3 products. Counsel for Rambus and
17
Nanya conducted a meet and confer on August 29, 2008 and September 4, 2008, and were
18
unable to reach an agreement regarding Nanya’s provision of a corporate 30(b)(6) witness to
19
testify with respect to DDR3. (See Hubert Decl., ¶ 5 and Ex. F) Therefore, given the looming
20
21 deadline to file motions under Local Rule 26-2, Rambus brings this motion to compel the
22 deposition of Nanya’s corporate designees on Topics 1-11 of Rambus’s Notice of Deposition
23 with respect to DDR3.

24 II. ARGUMENT
25 Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the
26
claim or defense of any party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). Upon a showing of “good cause” a
27
28
1
Austin 45778v3
1 Court may order discovery of any relevant matter. Id. Rambus seeks information in its
2 deposition topics related to the claims and defenses related to Nanya’s DDR3 products. (See
3
Hubert Decl., ¶ 2 and Ex. A.) DDR3 is properly the subject of this litigation. (See Hubert Decl.,
4
¶ 6 and Ex. D at 6-11.) However, Nanya has refused to provide a corporate witness as required
5
by Rule 30(b)(6) with respect to DDR3, claiming it has already provided such a witness, Mr.
6
Willie Liu, on October 17-18, 2007. (See Hubert Decl., ¶ 4 and Ex. C.) However, Nanya’s
7
8 argument is explicitly contradicted by objections made by Nanya’s counsel during Mr. Liu’s
9 deposition. During this deposition, counsel for Nanya repeatedly objected to questions related to
10 a number of Nanya products, including DDR3, stating that such questions were outside the scope
11
of Rambus’s 30(b)(6) notice (See Hubert Decl., ¶ 7 and Ex. E).

12
13
MCKOOL SMITH
DALLAS, TEXAS
14
15 Redacted
16
17
18
19
While Mr. Liu did
20
21 provide some information related to DDR3 while testifying in his personal capacity, his
22 knowledge of the deposition topics and specifically with respect to DDR3 product family was
23 limited.
24
25
Redacted
26
27
28
2
1 Furthermore, Nanya produced on
2 August 8, 2008, over four hundred thousand pages of documents, including a significant number
3
of technical documents related to its DDR3 products, and Rambus has not had the opportunity to
4
question a corporate witness with respect to these materials. Nanya cannot have it both ways,
5
objecting to questions propounded to Mr. Liu regarding DDR3 during his deposition as outside
6
the scope of Rambus’s 30(b)(6) notice and directing the deponent to answer in his personal
7
8 capacity with respect to such objections, and now claiming that the witness was a corporate
9 30(b)(6) representative testifying on behalf of Nanya. Rambus therefore requests this Court to
10 compel Nanya to produce a 30(b(6) witness to testify with respect to Topics 1-11 of Rambus’s
11
Deposition Notice with respect to Nanya’s DDR3 products.

12
13 III. CONCLUSION
MCKOOL SMITH
DALLAS, TEXAS
14
For these reasons, Rambus respectfully requests that the Court grant its motion.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
2
Dated: September 5, 2008 Respectfully submitted,
3
MUNGER TOLLES & OLSON LLP
4 SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
5 MCKOOL SMITH P.C.
7 /s/ Pierre J. Hubert
8 Attorneys for RAMBUS INC.

9 Austin 41241v1
10
11
12
13
MCKOOL SMITH
DALLAS, TEXAS
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4

2133 1

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

2133 1

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2133 Filed 09/05/2008 Page 1 of 7

1 GREGORY P. STONE (SBN 078329) ROLLIN A. RANSOM (SBN 196126)

13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14 SAN JOSE DIVISION

16 RAMBUS INC., ) Case No. C 05-00334 RMW

1 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., HYNIX )

1 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION

2 TO DEFENDANTS NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION AND NANYA

business days of the Court’s order.

1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

22 deposition of Nanya’s corporate designees on Topics 1-11 of Rambus’s Notice of Deposition

23 with respect to DDR3.

of Rambus’s 30(b)(6) notice (See Hubert Decl., ¶ 7 and Ex. E).

1 Furthermore, Nanya produced on

Deposition Notice with respect to Nanya’s DDR3 products.

7 /s/ Pierre J. Hubert

8 Attorneys for RAMBUS INC.

S-ar putea să vă placă și