Consumer Law Library

Rambus Incorporated

Volume 146 · 146 F.T.C. 923

Citation
146 F.T.C. 923
Docket
9302
Decision
2008-10-16
Document type
interlocutory order
Case type
antitrust
Industry
computer memory technology
Outcome
other
Relief
other
Source
Original volume PDF
Original PDF
This decision as a PDF

Cite this decision

Rambus Incorporated, 146 F.T.C. 923 (2008). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v146-0029

Report an error in this record (decision id v146-0029)

Order status: unknown. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF RAMBUS INCORPORATED Docket No. 9302 Order, October 16, 2008 Order granting the joint motion seeking an order authorizing Rambus to receive excess consideration incurred by contingent contractual rights pursuant to Paragraph 1 of the Commission’s March 16, 2007 Stay Order. ORDER AUTHORIZING RESPONDENT TO RECEIVE EXCESS CONSIDERATION HELD PURSUANT TO CONTINGENT CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION Paragraph 1.c. of the Commission Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Respondent's Motion for Stay of Final Order Pending Appeal (March 16, 2007) (“Stay Order”) permitted Respondent to incur contingent contractual rights to consideration in excess of that permitted by the Final Order issued in this matter if the consideration were payable to Respondent only upon the issuance by the Commission of an order authorizing Respondent to receive such consideration. The Commission stated in Paragraph 1.c. of the Stay Order that it would issue an order authorizing Respondent to receive such consideration promptly after receiving a mandate from a court of appeals. On April 22, 2008, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals ordered that the Commission’s orders in this matter be set aside and that this matter be remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s opinion. On August 26, 2008, the Court denied the Commission’s petition for a rehearing en banc. On September 9, 2008, the Court issued its mandate. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT, as used herein, the term “Excess Consideration” shall mean fees, royalties, payments, judgments, and other consideration in excess of that permitted by Paragraphs IV, V.A., VI, and VII of the Final Order; and VOLUME 144 Interlocutory Orders, Etc.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, within the meaning of Paragraph 1.c. of the Stay Order, Respondent may receive Excess Consideration (and accrued interest) payable pursuant to any contingent contractual obligation.

By the Commission.

WHOLE FOODS MARKET, INC. 925 Interlocutory Orders, Etc.

← 146 F.T.C. 917 · 146 F.T.C. 925 →