Infineon accuses Rambus of litigation misconduct

The request was made public even as Rambus went to court to appeal against another verdict in the long-running legal battle that said the memory technology developer was guilty of fraud.

Infineon request for dismissal was filed last week with the US District Court for Virginia, Judge Robert E Payne presiding. The memory maker claims Rambus' lawsuit is merely a tactic employed to further attempts to dominate the DRAM industry. Infineon alleges that in 1998, 1999 and 2000, Rambus ran "shredding parties" in which documents that might have a negative impact on future litigation. It also "obstructed" Infineon's discovery efforts, the complaint maintains.

The German company also claims its opponent made "false statements in support of litigation positions that would have been untenable but for Rambus' destruction of evidence". Witnesses for Rambus made "false testimony", Infineon alleges.

Consequently, it wants the case thrown out "not only to prevent an injustice to Infineon but also to preserve the integrity of the judicial process itself".

Rambus has yet to respond to the request, perhaps because its lawyers minds have been focused on the company's appeal. On Monday, the company appeared before the US Court of Appeals to claim that it had no patent applications pending during the time it was a member of the JEDEC SDRAM standard-setting panel. On that basis, it said, it could not be guilty of fraud.

That it was judged to have been so followed action brought against it by Infineon. Rambus was ruled to have committed fraud by not making known to JEDEC, as it was obliged to do while a member of that organisation's SDRAM panel, patents it held for technology that would go on to become part of the SDRAM standard. Infineon and others maintain that Rambus knowingly got its technology incorporated into the SDRAM standard in order to reap huge licence fees from memory makers later on.

The case arose out of counter-action brought by Infineon and others after they were sued by Rambus for violating said patents in SDRAM products based on the JEDEC standard.

Since the original lawsuits were filed, the counterclaims have been judged, appealed against, gone back to the lower court and are now once again in the hands of the Court of Appeals. The Court is expected to come to a verdict in one to four months' time.