Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

In Re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litigation

Track this case

Case Number:

4:02-md-01486

Court:

California Northern

Nature of Suit:

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action, Multi-district Litigation

Judge:

Phyllis J. Hamilton

Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

Sectors & Industries:

June 25, 2014
$310M DRAM Price-Fixing Deal Sails Past Objectors

A California federal judge granted final approval Wednesday to a $310 million settlement that includes $78 million for attorneys in indirect purchasers' multidistrict litigation accusing makers of computer memory chips of price-fixing, overruling objectors who said the deal wasn't fair because it includes states that don't allow indirect purchaser claims.
June 12, 2014
DRAM Indirect Purchasers Press Judge On $78M Fee Bid

Counsel for indirect purchasers and numerous state attorneys nudged a California federal judge on Tuesday to approve a nearly $78 million fee request in antitrust litigation over the dynamic random-access memory market, arguing they only received four objections to fees for securing a $310 million settlement.
May 05, 2014
Objectors Question $310M Samsung, Toshiba Settlement

The $310 million settlement meant to end a series of antitrust class actions against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Toshiba Corp. and others over the dynamic random-access memory market garnered two objections Monday, calling the settlement unfair to California class members.
March 12, 2014
Straus & Boies, Others Want $78M In DRAM Antitrust Case

Counsel for indirect purchasers and numerous state attorneys general asked a California federal judge on Tuesday to approve a nearly $77.7 million fee request in antitrust litigation over the dynamic random-access memory market, arguing their decadelong effort to secure a $310 million settlement merited the award.
December 12, 2013
Samsung, Other Cos. Fork Over $310M In DRAM Antitrust Suit

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Toshiba Corp. and other technology firms on Wednesday agreed to pay $310 million to settle a series of class actions based in California federal court brought by individual purchasers and state attorneys general alleging a host of anti-competitive conduct in the dynamic random-access memory market.