Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 1 of 8

1 Gregory P. Stone (#078329)

Keith R. D. Hamilton (#252115)
2 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, 35th Floor
3 Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Telephone: (213) 683-9100
4 Facsimile: (213) 687-3702
E-mail: gregory.stone@mto.com;
5 keith.hamilton@mto.com
6 Burton A. Gross (#166285)
Carolyn Hoecker Luedtke (#207976)
7 Miriam Kim (#238230)
MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
8 560 Mission Street, 27th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2907
9 Telephone: (415) 512-4000
Facsimile: (415) 512-4077
10 E-mail: burton.gross@mto.com;
carolyn.luedtke@mto.com;
11 miriam.kim@mto.com
12 Attorneys for Plaintiff RAMBUS INC.
13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

15 RAMBUS INC., CASE NO.: C 05-00334 RMW

16 Plaintiff, RAMBUS INC.’S SUBMISSION OF A
REVISED TRIAL WITNESS LIST
17 vs.
18 HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., et al.,
19 Defendants
CASE NO.: C 05-02298 RMW
20 RAMBUS INC.,

21 Plaintiff,
v.
22
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
23 et al.,
24 Defendants
25

26

27

28

RAMBUS’S SUBMISSION OF A REVISED TRIAL WITNESS LIST

CASE NOS. 05-00334, 05-02298
 Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 2 of 8

1 At the September 11, 2008 Pretrial Conference, Samsung notified the Court that it
2 was dismissing with prejudice certain of its allegations, claims, and defenses related to JEDEC,
3 RDRAM license negotiations, and Neil Steinberg and that it would be filing a pleading with the
4 Court setting forth specifically what was being dismissed with prejudice. Rambus agreed that it
5 would provide a revised trial witness list within twenty-four hours of Samsung filing this pleading
6 setting forth with specificity what it was dismissing with prejudice.
7 Samsung has not yet filed this pleading. In fact, recent communications with
8 Samsung’s counsel suggest that Samsung is now refusing to do so. As a consequence, at the
9 September 15, 2008 Pretrial Conference, Rambus will request that the Court require Samsung to
10 file a formal pleading setting forth with specificity the allegations, claims, and defenses that it is
11 dismissing with prejudice. Such a pleading is necessary so that not only this Court, but other
12 courts, will have a clear record of what has been dismissed with prejudice and of what is being
13 tried beginning next week. Rambus, as well, needs to know for certain what allegations, claims
14 and defenses remain in this case and have not been dismissed with prejudice.
15 In the meantime, Rambus does not wish to do anything that might delay the case
16 from proceeding to trial on September 22, 2008. To that end, Rambus attaches as Exhibit B a
17 revised trial witness list that is intended to modify Rambus’s trial witness list previously filed
18 with the Court as Exhibit B to the August 27, 2008 Joint Pretrial Statement. The submission of
19 this revised witness list is based on Rambus’s assumption that Samsung’s allegations, claims, and
20 defenses related to JEDEC, RDRAM license negotiations, and Neil Steinberg have all been
21 dismissed with prejudice and that a pleading will be filed by Samsung memorializing these
22 dismissals.
23 Rambus has reduced its live trial witness list as much as possible. Rambus has
24 reduced its “will call” witnesses from nine to seven, and has reduced its “may call” witnesses
25 from twenty-four to twelve. Further, Rambus notes that several of its witnesses are designated for
26 topics related to Rambus’s preservation, collection, and production of documents. Specifically,
27 James Berry, Sean Cunningham, Joel Karp, Carolyn Hoecker Luedtke, and Lester Vincent are all
28 designated to respond, if necessary, to allegations Samsung might make that Rambus destroyed

RAMBUS’S SUBMISSION OF A REVISED TRIAL WITNESS LIST

CASE NOS. 05-00334, 05-02298
 Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 3 of 8

1 particular documents or types of documents. At this date, Samsung has not articulated with any
2 specificity the documents or categories of documents that it alleges Rambus destroyed. Rambus
3 presumes that Samsung will attempt to make such a showing prior to the close evidence in
4 Samsung’s case, and Rambus has designated these witnesses to allow Rambus to respond to those
5 allegations. If Samsung would inform Rambus and the Court in advance of trial what documents
6 and/or categories of documents it alleges Rambus destroyed, then Rambus may be able to further
7 narrow its “may call” witness list. Alternatively, if Samsung’s allegations of what documents
8 were allegedly destroyed is identical to Hynix’s allegations at the 2005 unclean hands trial, then
9 similarly Rambus should be able to further narrow its “may call” witness list.
10

11 DATED: September 15, 2008 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

12

13

14 By: /s/ Carolyn Hoecker Luedtke

CAROLYN H. LUEDTKE
15
Attorneys for Plaintiff RAMBUS INC.
16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
-2-
RAMBUS’S SUBMISSION OF A REVISED TRIAL WITNESS LIST
CASE NOS. 05-00334, 05-02298
Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 4 of 8

Exhibit B
Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 5 of 8

Rambus’s Revised Trial Witness List

September 22, 2008 Trial

The following is Rambus’s amended list of live trial witnesses that Rambus presently
intends to call in response to Samsung’s case-in-chief, with a short statement of the
substance of testimony to be given by the witness. This list is submitted based on the
assumption that Samsung will file a pleading with the Court stating with specificity that
its the allegations, claims, and defenses related to JEDEC, RDRAM license negotiations,
and Neil Steinberg are dismissed with prejudice.

1. Sanjay Banarjee (Rebuttal Expert)

Rebuttal expert responding to Sechen's report regarding the meaning of Sections

1.7 and 1.8, particularly regarding scope of SDR/DDR license with respect to
DDR2 and subsequent generations of products

2. Ira Blumberg

Negotiation of extension to Rambus/Samsung license agreement in 2005;

Rambus's royalty audit of Samsung, 2003-2005; Samsung's allegations that
Rambus breached Section 3.8 and 8.5 of the Rambus/Samsung license agreement;
Rambus/Infineon license negotiations and agreement; value of Rambus's
inventions

3. Matthew Lynde (Rebuttal Expert)

Rebuttal expert regarding Samsung's damages

4. John Montana (Expert)

Expert on document retention policies and practices

5. Nigel Shepherd (Ernst & Young)

Rambus’s royalty audit of Samsung, 2003-2005

6. Neil Steinberg

Rambus's document preservation, collection, and production; prosecution of

Rambus’s patents; Samsung/Rambus license negotiations.

1 9/15/08 Revised Witness List

Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 6 of 8

7. Geoff Tate

Rambus’s general business background and licensing agreements;

Samsung/Rambus licensing negotiations; Rambus's document retention policies
and practices.

***

The following are live trial witnesses that Rambus may call in response to Samsung’s
case-in-chief, with a short statement of the substance of testimony to be given by the
witness. Many of these witnesses relate to Samsung’s allegations of document
destruction. Rambus may be able to narrow this list further if Samsung will specify what
documents or categories of documents it alleges Rambus destroyed.

1. James Berry (Munger, Tolles and Olson LLP)

Rambus's document production and existence of Rambus documents alleged to be

destroyed; Samsung's document production and lack of production

2. Sean Cunningham (DLA Piper)

Document preservation, collection, and production in connection with Rambus

litigation

3. John Danforth

Negotiation of extension to Rambus/Samsung license agreement in 2005;

Rambus's audit of Samsung, 2003-2005; Samsung's allegations that Rambus
breached Section 3.8 and 8.5 of the Rambus/Samsung license agreement;
Rambus/Infineon license negotiations and agreement

4. William Deley

Rambus's royalty audit of Samsung, 2003-2005

5. Harold Hughes

Negotiation of extension to Rambus/Samsung license agreement in 2005;

Rambus's royalty audit of Samsung, 2003-2005; Samsung's allegations that
Rambus breached Section 3.8 and 8.5 of the Rambus/Samsung license agreement;
Rambus/Infineon license negotiations and agreement; value of Rambus's
inventions; Rambus's general business background

2 9/15/08 Revised Witness List

Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 7 of 8

6. Joel Karp

Rambus's document retention policies and practices, licensing, and general

business background; Samsung's document retention policies and practices;
development of licensing strategy for Rambus.

7. Carolyn Hoecker Luedtke (Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP)

Rambus's document production and existence of Rambus documents alleged to be

destroyed; Samsung's document production and lack of production

8. David Mooring

Samsung/Rambus licensing negotiations; Rambus's document retention policies

and practices; Rambus’s license negotiations with nVIDIA and ATI

9. Charles Shemwell (outside counsel)

Negotiation of SDR/DDR License in 2000 between Samsung and Rambus

10. Lester Vincent (Blakely)

Prosecution of Rambus's patents and patent file retention

11. In Sang Yoo (Ernst & Young)

Rambus's royalty audit of Samsung, 2003-2005

12. Simon Hoon Yoo (Ernst & Young)

Rambus's royalty audit of Samsung, 2003-2005

***

C. In addition, Rambus may offer, via videotape or read in, prior trial or deposition
testimony of the following witnesses, the designations of which have been exchanged
with Samsung:

1. Yun-Ho Choi

2. William Deley

3. Charles Donohoe

4. Eushuk Andrew Hong

3 9/15/08 Revised Witness List

Case 5:05-cv-00334-RMW Document 2197 Filed 09/15/2008 Page 8 of 8

5. Jon Kang

6. Chang Hyun Kim

7. Gwang Ho Kim

8. Myungho Kim

9. Seung Bum Ko

10. Kye Hyun Kyung

11. Jung-Bae Lee

12. Seung Bum Ma

13. Jin Seong Park

14. Jun Sung Park

15. Young Hwan Park

16. Jay Shim

17. Han Yong Uhm

4 9/15/08 Revised Witness List