Micron Tech. v. Rambus

Opinion on Spoliation in Micron Tech. v. Rambus

more+
less-

The judge found that at the same time that the patent holder was contemplating litigation in order to establish a royalty rate and to validate its patents, it implemented a document retention policy. Documents were being destroyed

pursuant to the new policy. It was not until later a “litigation hold” was instituted.

The Court determined that the retention policy was “discussed and adopted within the context of [the patent holder’s] litigation strategy,” and that the patent holder “knew, or should have known, that a general implementation

of the policy was inappropriate because the documents destroyed would become material at some point in the future.”

The Court found that the showing of bad faith was so clear and convincing, that the only appropriate sanction was to declare the patents unenforceable against Micron.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates

Reference Info:Decision | Federal, 3rd Circuit, Delaware | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Doug Cornelius | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »