UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20436 Before the Honorable Theodore R.

Essex Administrative Law Judge

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

RESPONDENT BROADCOMS RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANT RAMBUSS AND RESPONDENT FREESCALES JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE ON THE BASIS OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Respondent Broadcom Corporation (Broadcom) objects that Complainant Rambus Inc.s (Rambuss) and Respondent Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.s (Freescales) Joint Motion to Terminate Investigation as to Respondent Freescale on the Basis of Settlement Agreement, filed June 7, 2011 (Motion Docket No. 753-023) (Joint Motion) fails to comply with Commission rules and unfairly deprives Broadcom (as well as the other Respondents and the public) of access to Rambus and Freescale's settlement agreements. First, Rule 210.21(b) requires that motions for termination based on settlement agreements include copies of the licensing or other settlement agreement, as well as any supplemental agreements. (Emphasis added.) The Joint Motion acknowledges that there are at least three agreements between Rambus and Freescale: (1) the Settlement Agreement; (2) the supporting agreement referenced therein; and (3) the Patent License Agreement. See Joint Motion, at 1. The copies of the motion served on Broadcoms counsel, however, contain only two agreements: the Settlement Agreement and the License Agreement.

76617-0002/LEGAL21129283.1

The existence of a third agreement is further evidenced by Paragraph 9.1 of the Settlement Agreement, which provides:

Despite the apparent existence of a third agreement between Rambus and Freescale, in addition to the Settlement Agreement and License Agreement, no such agreement is attached to either the confidential (albeit heavily redacted, as discussed below) or public versions of the Joint Motion. Broadcom submits that Rambus and Freescale should be required to comply with the plain language of Rule 210.21(b) and produce any supplemental agreements to Broadcom. Second, Broadcom objects to the extensive redactions that pervade even the confidentialoutside counsel eyes onlyversion of the agreements that are attached to the Joint Motion. Although Broadcom recognizes that, in some circumstances, redactions of confidential financial terms of settlement agreements may be permitted by the ITC, financial terms in this case are particularly relevant and should be disclosed because Rambus relies exclusively on licensing activity to establish domestic industry in this case. Compare In re Certain Machine Vision Software, Machine Vision Systems, & Prods. Containing Same, Inv. 337-TA-680, Order 17, 2009 WL 3535542 (permitting redaction of financial terms where the complainant did not rely on licenses to establish domestic industry) with In re Certain ShortWavelength Light Emitting Diodes, Laser Diodes & Prods. Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA640, Order 16 (ordering disclosure of terms of license where complainant relied on licenses to establish domestic industry). The financial terms of the Freescale settlement are relevant to

76617-0002/LEGAL21129283.1

numerous issues in this case, including but not limited to FRAND defenses, obviousness arguments, domestic industry, bond, patent exhaustion, and remedy.1 Moreover, Rambus and Freescales redactions to the subset of the agreements provided to Respondents appear to go well beyond financial terms, including multiple pages that are redacted in their entireties, redaction of the very name of the separate side agreement, redaction of provisions relating to confidentiality agreements between the parties, and redactions of definitions. See Exh. B to Joint Motion, at pp.7-8 (pages redacted in their entireties), 13 (redacting the name of the side agreement from 9.1), 14-15 (redacting provisions of the confidentiality agreement found in 9.13); see also License Agreement attached to Exh. B to Joint Motion, at 1.19 & 1.21 (redacting definitions), pp.8-12 (redacting large blocks of text), and pp.20-25 (pages redacted in their entireties). Broadcom therefore submits that Rambus and Freescale should be required to provide to all parties with fully unredacted versions of all agreements between Rambus and Freescale. To the extent, however, that it is determined that it is permissible for Freescale and Rambus to redact financial terms (which Broadcom does not agree is appropriate), Broadcom submits that Freescale and Rambus should be required to limit redactions to only provisions that are, indeed, financial terms.

Notably, Broadcom has served requests for production on both Rambus and Freescale, seeking unredacted versions of the agreements between Freescale and Rambus, as well as all communications relating to them. In response, Rambus refused to produce any documents except for the redacted Settlement and License Agreements already served on Broadcom.

76617-0002/LEGAL21129283.1

Dated: June 17, 2011

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Amanda Tessar Amanda Tessar PERKINS COIE LLP 1900 Sixteenth Street, Suite 1400 Denver, CO 80202-5255 Telephone: 303.291.2357 Patricia E. Chow PERKINS COIE LLP 700 Thirteenth Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005-3960 Telephone: 202.654.6200 Emily J. Lee PERKINS COIE LLP 1 East Main Street, Suite 201 Madison, WI 53703-5118 Telephone: 608.663.7460 COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT BROADCOM CORPORATION

76617-0002/LEGAL21129283.1

In re Certain Semiconductor Chips and Products Containing Same CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Inv. 337-TA-753

I, Yu-Ing Huang, hereby certify that on this 17th day of June, 2011 copies of foregoing document were filed and served upon the following parties as indicated: James. R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W., Room 112 Washington, D.C. 20436 Honorable Theodore R. Essex (2 copies) U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W., Room 317 Washington, D.C. 20436 Email: tamara.foley@usitc.gov Anne Goalwin Office of Unfair Import Investigations U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20436 Email: anne.goalwin@usitc.gov Counsel for Complainant Rambus, Inc. Christine Lehman Finnegan Henderson 901 New York Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Email: ITC753-Service@finnegan.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Filing Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery (2 copies) Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondents Broadcom Corporation, Mediatek Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc., Motorola, Inc., nVidia Corporation, Oppo Digital, Inc., and Audio Partnership PLC Thomas D. Pease Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan 51 Madison Ave., 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 Email: Quinn-ITC-753@quinnemanuel.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondents Broadcom Corporation, Mediatek Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc. Marcia H. Sundeen Kenyon & Kenyon 1500 K Street Washington, D.C. 20005 Email: 337-753Kenyon@kenyon.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondent Motorola, Inc. Jamie Beaber Steptoe & Johnson 1330 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Email: S&Jmotorola753@steptoe.com Counsel for Respondent Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. Blaney Harper Jones Day 51 Louisiana Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Email: FSL753@jonesday.com Counsel for Respondent Garmin International Inc. Louis S. Mastriani Adduci, Mastriani & Schaumberg 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Fifth Floor Washington, DC 20036 ]Email: gar-3@adduci.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondent Hitachi Global Storage Technologies Alexander J. Hadjis Morrison & Foerster 200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 6000 Washington, D.C. 20006 Email: mofo753-service@mofo.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondents LSI Corporation and Seagate Technology Jonathan D. Link Kilpatrick Townsend &Stockton 607 14th St., N.W., Suite 900 Washington, D.C. 20005 Email: LSIrambusITC@kilpatricktownsend.com Kandis C. Gibson Foster, Murphy, Altman & Nickel 1899 L Street, NW, Suite 1150 Washington, DC 20036 Email: FM-LSI@fostermurphy.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondents NVIDIA Corporation; ASUSTek Computer, Inc.; Asus Computer International, Inc.; Biostar Microtech (U.S.A.) Corporation; Biostar Microtech International Corporation; EliteGroup Computer Systems Co., Ltd.; EVGA Corporation; Galaxy Microsystems, Ltd.; Giga-Byte Technology Co., Ltd; G.B.T., Inc.; Hewlett-Packard Company; Jaton Corporation; Jaton Technology TPE; Micro-Star International Co., Ltd.; MSI Computer Corporation;Gracom Technologies LLC; Palit Microsystems, Ltd.; Pine Technology Holdings, Ltd.; Sparkle Computer Co., Ltd.; Zotac USA, Inc.; Zotac International (MCO), Ltd. Andrew R. Kopsidas Fish & Richardson 1425 K St., N.W., 11th Floor Washington, D.C. 20005 Email: 337-753fish@fr.com Counsel for Respondent nVidia Corporation I. Neel Chatterjee Orrick Herrington & Sutcliff 1000 Marsh Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 Email: Orrick753-service@orrick.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

Counsel for Respondents STMicroelectronics N V and STMicroelectronics Inc Eric Rusnak K&L Gates 1601 K Street, NW Washington DC 20006 Email: STMicro ITC753@klgates.com Via First Class Mail Via Hand Delivery Via Overnight Courier Via Electronic Mail

__________________________________ Yu-Ing Huang