Legal Opinion
Rambus Inc. v. Hynix Semiconductor Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided December 29, 2008No. Nos. C-05-00334 RMW, C-05-02298 RMW, C-06-00244 RMWPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON THE MANUFACTURERS’ DAUBERT MOTION No. 1 TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF ROBERT MURPHY ON SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS OF NONOBVIOUSNESS
RONALD M. WHYTE, District Judge.
Rambus has accused the Manufacturers1 of infringing various patents. Trial is scheduled for January 19, 2009. Pursuant to a case management deadline for filing Daubert motions, the Manufacturers have filed a motion challenging the ability of Robert Murphy (Rambus’s technical expert) to testify regarding secondary considerations allegedly relevant to show that Rambus’s patent claims were not obviousness on their effective filing…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- In Re Paoli Railroad Yard PCB LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Milwaukee Elec. Tool Corp. v. Snap-On Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2017
- Lutron Electronics Co. v. Crestron Electronics, Inc.District Court, D. Utah · 2013
- Boston Scientific Corp. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLCCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2016
- Brighton Collectibles, Inc. v. RK Texas Leather Mfg.District Court, S.D. California · 2013
- FWK Holdings LLC v. Shire PLC (Direct Purchaser Antitrust Class Action Complaint)District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.