Legal Opinion
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Rambus, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 29, 2008No. 2006-1579PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia denied Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.’s (Samsung) motion for attorney fees and issued a lengthy opinion addressing issues relating to the alleged spoliation of evidence by Rambus, Inc. (Rambus), but not relevant to the basis for judgment in favor of Samsung. When Rambus offered to pay Samsung’s requested attorney fees in full, the case before the district court became moot. Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. v. Rambus, Inc., 439 F.Supp.2d 524 (E.D.Va.2006). This court therefore vacates the order of the district…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Whitmore Ex Rel. Simmons v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Arizonans for Official English v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Goodman v. Praxair Services, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2009
- Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Management & Training Corporation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
- Tanasi v. New Alliance BankCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015
- Diaz v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.