In Sun Microsystems Inc. v. Hynx Semiconductor Inc. et al., Northern District of California Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment, allowing the case of price manipulation of dynamic random access memory to go forward on the plaintiff’s Sherman Act claims. In their summary judgment motion defendants argued that plaintiff did not show that Hynx’s actions affected Sun. Although calling defendants’ efforts “valiant,” the court denied their motion, holding that plaintiff presented “sufficient circumstantial and expert evidence to create a triable issue of fact as to whether defendants’ conduct affected benchmark prices for DRAM, which in turn raised prices industrywide.” The court did, however, strike certain claims from Sun’s suit, including claims related to conspiracy against Mitsubishi Electric Corp., holding that plaintiff did not present sufficient evidence tying conspiratorial activity to any particular Mitsubishi entity.
One Comment