PUBLIC VERSION

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.

In the Matter of: Investigation No. 337-TA-753 CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

COMPLAINANT RAMBUS INC.S SUBMISSION ON THE ISSUES OF REMEDY, THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND BONDING

PUBLIC VERSION

I. II.

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 THE APPROPRIATE REMEDY IS A GENERAL EXCLUSION ORDER AND CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS ....................................................................................... 1 A. A General Exclusion Order Is Justified and Necessary .......................................... 1 1. 2. A General Exclusion Order Is Needed to Prevent Circumvention of an Exclusion Order Limited to Respondents Products .............................. 2 A General Exclusion Order Is Needed Because of Pattern of Violation and Difficulty in Identifying the Source of Infringing Products....................................................................................................... 4

B. C. D. III. IV. V.

A Limited Exclusion Order Should Ban All Infringing Products of the Named Respondents from Importation ................................................................... 5 Cease and Desist Orders Are Justified .................................................................... 8 The Public Interest .................................................................................................. 9

THE APPROPRIATE BOND IS 100% OF ENTERED VALUE .................................... 10 ADDITIONAL REQUESTED INFORMATION ............................................................ 12 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 12

PUBLIC VERSION

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) FEDERAL CASES Certain Agricultural Tractors, Inv. No. 337-TA-380, 44 USPQ2d 1385 (Mar. 1997) ...............................................................2 Certain Automotive Parts, Inv. No. 337-TA-557, Commn Op., 2007 ITC LEXIS 926 (July 5, 2007) ..............................4 Certain Baseband Processor Chips and Chipsets, Transmitter and Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control Chips, and Prods. Containing Same, Including Cellular Telephone Handsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-543, Commn Op. (June 7, 2007), revd on other grounds, Kyocera, 545 F.3d 1340 ......................................................................................................................7, 10 Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-424, Notice of Issuance of General Exclusion Order, 2000 ITC LEXIS 319 (Oct. 16, 2000) ........................................................................................................4 Certain Compact Multipurpose Tools, Inv. No. 337-TA-416, Commn Op., 1999 ITC LEXIS 277 (Sept. 7, 1999) .............................4 Certain Crystalline Cefadroxil Monohydrate, Inv. No. 337-TA-293, Commn Op. on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding, USITC Pub. 2391 (June 1991) ...................................................................................................8 Certain Display Controllers and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-491/481, Commn Op. (Feb. 4, 2005) .........................................................10 Certain DVD Players and Recorders and Certain Prods. Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-603, Corrected Limited Exclusion Order, USITC Pub. No. 4158 (Mar. 14, 2008) ......................................................................................................................6, 7 Certain Dynamic Random Access Memories, Components Thereof and Prods. Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-242, Commn Op. on Violation, Remedy, Bonding and the Public Interest, USITC Pub. No. 2034, 1987 WL 450856 (September 21, 1987). ...........................11 Certain Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memories, Components Thereof, Prods. Containing Such Memories, and Processes for Making Such Memories, Inv. No. 337-TA-276, Commn Op. (May 16, 1989) ........................................................5, 6, 7

ii

PUBLIC VERSION

Certain Neodymium-Iron-Boron Magnets, Inv. No. 337-TA-372, Notice of Issuance of General Exclusion Order, 1996 ITC LEXIS 124 (Mar. 29, 1996) ...................................................................................................2, 4 Kyocera Wireless Corp. v ITC, 545 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2008)..............................................................................................6, 7 Spansion, Inc. v. Intl Trade Commn, 629 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2010)..................................................................................................9 FEDERAL STATUTES 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1) ....................................................................................................................9 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(2) ....................................................................................................................2 19 U.S.C. 1337(j)(3) .....................................................................................................................1

iii

PUBLIC VERSION

I.

INTRODUCTION The appropriate remedy in this Investigation is a general exclusion order barring

importation of Respondents products, even if they are imported by others as stand-alone products or incorporated into different products. In the alternative, a limited exclusion order directed to all accused products of the named Respondents should be entered. In addition, cease and desist orders directed to the Respondents identified as having commercially significant inventory are also appropriate. No public interest factors weigh against the appropriate remedy. Finally, the evidence shows that the appropriate bond to be imposed during the Presidential review period is 100% of the entered value. II. THE APPROPRIATE REMEDY IS A GENERAL EXCLUSION ORDER AND CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS While a limited exclusion order directed to the Respondents infringing products is appropriate here, the more appropriate remedy is a general exclusion order barring importation into the United States of all products, regardless of the importer, that incorporate the Respondents infringing products. In addition, the evidence Rambus presented shows that an appropriate additional remedy is the issuance of permanent cease and desist orders pursuant to Section 337(f), directing Respondents to cease and desist from importing, marketing, advertising, demonstrating, sampling, warehousing inventory for distribution, offering for sale, selling, distributing, licensing, or using any semiconductor chips that include memory controllers and/or peripheral interfaces and products containing said semiconductor chips, that infringe any claim of the Asserted Patents. A. A General Exclusion Order Is Justified and Necessary

A general exclusion order is necessary because (1) a limited exclusion order will be easily circumvented by Respondents, and (2) there is a pattern of violation of Section 337 and it

PUBLIC VERSION

PUBLIC VERSION

2165-66, 2177-82 with HTr. 1881-84; CX-7102; JX-25C.0020. Regardless, if Respondents products do not enter the United States, or do not enter the U.S. in any significant quantity, they have no reason to resist imposition of the tailored general exclusion order requested by Rambus. In fact, Respondents contention that they have no idea how their products enter the U.S., or even if they do, firmly establishes that the only way to prevent infringing products from entering the U.S. is through a tailored general exclusion order. The ALJ did not recommend a general exclusion order, in part because Rambus named a large number of Respondents, which the ALJ found to be evidence that it is not sufficiently difficult for Rambus to identify the source of infringing products. ID at 370. But Respondents argued that a general exclusion order is not warranted here because Rambus failed to name even more respondents, beyond the 34 named in the Complaint. RIB 290-93. Rambus cannot be denied a General Exclusion Order because it named both too many and too few Respondents. Respondents asserted in their Posthearing Brief that all of the Supplier Respondents produced customer lists that identify customers beyond those named in the investigation. RIB 292. Yet, as Respondents own expert admitted, failed to identify a named

Respondent, as one of its customers, despite issuing a press release about supplying HTr. 1881-84. corporate witnesses were also unable to identify specific products chips. RX-

imported in to the U.S. by its customers that include infringing

6286C.0005; JX-025C.0020; JX-138C.0015; JX-055C.0015; JX-080C.0034; JX-027C.0024. Respondents cannot have it both ways, and the inconsistent testimony provided evidences a true need for a general exclusion order. No. 319834 at 4 (February 24, 2009). While has been terminated from this Investigation due to a settlement agreement, the actions taken by are illustrative of the industry and difficulties in identifying the many different ways end products can enter the United States. 3

PUBLIC VERSION

2.

A General Exclusion Order Is Needed Because of Pattern of Violation and Difficulty in Identifying the Source of Infringing Products

A general exclusion order is also appropriate here because of the widespread unauthorized use of the patented technology demonstrated by the importation of infringing products by the many named Respondents in this Investigation, as well as the seventeen Respondents found in violation in the 661 Investigation. Notably, the 661 Investigation resulted in a finding of violation and issuance of a limited exclusion order. Some of the 661 Respondents were named again in this Investigation because products of other suppliers infringed the same patents at issue in 661. Commission precedent is clear that violation by six (and even fewer) respondents is considered numerous for purposes of a general exclusion order. Certain

Automotive Parts, Inv. No. 337-TA-557, Commn Op., 2007 ITC LEXIS 926, at *1-2, *18-19 (July 5, 2007) (six respondents); Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA424, Notice of Issuance of General Exclusion Order, 2000 ITC LEXIS 319, at *1-5 (Oct. 16, 2000) (four respondents); Certain Compact Multipurpose Tools, Inv. No. 337-TA-416, Commn Op., 1999 ITC LEXIS 277, at *1-2 (Sept. 7, 1999) (six respondents); Certain Neodymium-IronBoron Magnets, Magnet Alloys, and Articles Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-372, Notice of Issuance of General Exclusion Order, 1996 ITC LEXIS 124, at *2-3 (Mar. 29, 1996) (five respondents). Both through the record in this Investigation and 661, Rambus has established widespread infringement. Respondents have many additional customers that distribute the Accused Products throughout the world, and those products eventually end up in the United States. See, e.g., HTr. 2165-66, 2177-82. Many Respondents, however, refused to provide information regarding the identity of customers during discovery, which is further evidence of the difficulty in identifying sources of infringing products. See, e.g., HTr. 1881-84, 2165-66, 2177-82; JX-025C.0020; JX4

PUBLIC VERSION

138C.0015; JX-055C.0015; JX-080C.0034; JX-027C.0024. Accordingly, a general exclusion order is the most appropriate remedy because there is a pattern of violation of Section 337 and it is difficult to identify the source of the infringing products. B. A Limited Exclusion Order Should Ban All Infringing Products of the Named Respondents from Importation

Respondents did not dispute that a limited exclusion order (LEO) is the default remedy should the Commission find a violation. RIB 293. A proposed LEO directed to the accused products that contain an accused semiconductor chip from the Supplier Respondents is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Respondents argued, however, that any LEO should be limited to only the accused chips and not the accused downstream products named in this Investigation. RIB 29394. The ALJ disagreed. ID at 372-373. Respondents argued that the LEO should not include the named downstream products because Rambus does not make competing products. RIB at 294. This argument simply ignores the overwhelming evidence that Rambuss licensees, such as nVidia, make products that compete with the named products at issue here. 9547C.0025; CX-7617C. See CX-

Thus, continued importation of named infringing downstream

products would disrupt the legitimate trade of Rambuss licensees. Respondents contend that some of their own infringing products are downstream in that some of the Accused Products are, for example, graphics cards that include a semiconductor chip on a board designed for insertion into a personal computer, and therefore a downstream product analysis is required as set forth in Certain Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memories, Components Thereof, Prods. Containing Such Memories, and Processes for Making Such Memories, Inv. No. 337-TA-276, Commn Op. at 125-126 (May 16, 1989), which set forth nine factors (the EPROMS factors) to be weighed as part of the downstream analysis. RPB at 430. While Rambus disagrees that the application of the EPROMS factors is necessary, that analysis 5

PUBLIC VERSION

supports excluding all of Respondents Accused Products. Dr. Vander Veen, Respondents expert, found the relative value of the infringing chip as compared to the downstream product was as high as . HTr. 1794. In fact, Respondents expert

conceded that such high relative values weighed in favor of an exclusion order. HTr. 1797-98. Thus, the first EPROMS factor supports exclusion of downstream products. Moreover, Dr. Vander Veen did not offer any opinions on the importance of the infringing chips to the operation of the downstream products, fully half of the relative value analysis. HTr. 1782-83. Further, Dr. Vander Veen conceded that his analysis artificially lowered the relative value because he did not factor out the profit and/or labor and manufacturing costs that go into the final sales values of the downstream products. HTr. 1786-91; see also ID at 372-373 (Should Respondents . . . attempt to rely on the testimony of Dr. Vander Veen as purportedly demonstrating that exclusion of certain downstream products is not warranted, such reliance is misplaced.). The second EPROMS factor, the identity of the manufacturer of the downstream products, weighs in favor of an exclusion order here because a limited exclusion order can only issue against the named Respondents. See Kyocera Wireless Corp. v ITC, 545 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Moreover, certification provisions are appropriate and administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. See Certain DVD Players and Recorders and Certain Prods. Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-603, Corrected Limited Exclusion Order at 3, USITC Pub. No. 4158, (Mar. 14, 2008). The third EPROMS factor, the incremental value to the complainant of the exclusion of downstream products, as well as the eighth factor, the opportunity for evasion of an exclusion order that does not include the downstream products, both support an exclusion order here.

PUBLIC VERSION

Rambus would be denied any effective relief without an exclusion order because semiconductor chips are almost always imported as part of a larger product. See, e.g., Certain Baseband Processor Chips and Chipsets, Transmitter and Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control Chips, and Prods. Containing Same, Including Cellular Telephone Handsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-543, Commn Op. at 36 (June 7, 2007), revd on other grounds, Kyocera, 545 F.3d 1340. In other words, Rambus would have no effective relief if downstream products are not excluded. Thus, Respondents arguments ignore the value such an exclusion order would have for Rambus and its licensees. The fourth EPROMS factor weighs in favor of an exclusion order because any detriment to the Respondents here is a consequence of their knowing infringement, having participated fully in this Investigation. Moreover, the Respondents have presented no evidence of legitimate trade that would be impacted. RPB at 433-34. The fifth EPROMS, the burden on third parties, supports an exclusion order here as any limited exclusion order would only apply to the named Respondents. Kyocera, 545 F.3d 1340. The sixth factor, does as well, because Respondents concede that alternative downstream products that do not contain the infringing articles are available. Rambus has licensed the asserted patents to a large number of licensees as part of its domestic industry, as discussed above. See RPB at 434. The seventh factor, the likelihood that downstream products actually contain the infringing chips, likewise supports an exclusion order. Rambus has identified the Accused Products from the named Respondents that should be subject to the exclusion order. See, e.g., CX-8173C (Hitachi); CX-10850C (Asus); CX-10856C (HP); and CX-10863C (Cisco). Moreover, a certification process can reduce the risk that legitimate trade would be disrupted and, contrary to the Respondents argument, would not burden Customs with having to differentiate between excluded and non-excluded products. DVD Players at 23; see also RPB at

PUBLIC VERSION

434. As the Respondents concede, the ninth EPROMS factor, the enforceability of an exclusion order by Customs, also supports an exclusion order here. RPB at 435. Any burden on Customs can be managed with the certification process that requires the Respondents to identify which products contain the infringing chips. See HTr. 1884-86. Thus, all the EPROMS factors support a limited exclusion order directed to all of Respondents Accused Products that contain an accused semiconductor chip from the Supplier Respondents. C. Cease and Desist Orders Are Justified

Here, the Commission should issue a cease and desist order against Respondents Asus, Garmin, Hitachi, LSI, and Seagate, as the ALJ recommended. ID at 374. Proposed orders are attached hereto as Exhibit C. Ordinarily a cease and desist order is appropriate where the evidence demonstrates the presence of commercially significant inventory in the United States. Certain Crystalline Cefadroxil Monohydrate, Inv. No. 337-TA-293, Commn Op. on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding at 37-42, USITC Pub. 2391 (June 1991). currently maintain significant inventory of accused products in the United States. CX-8173C; HTr. 1008; CX-7441C.0011-16; JX-115C.0025; CX-6779C; CX-6780C; CX-10850C; JX-76C.0038-40, 44-45;. Many of the Respondents entered into stipulations regarding their U.S. inventories, and significant inventory in the U.S. fact witness testified that it maintains

See CX-8173C; HTr. 1008; CX-7441C.0011-16; JX-

115C.0025; CX-6779C; CX-6780C; CX-10850C; JX-76C.0038-40, 44-45; see also SIB 229-30. Accordingly, the ITC should issue cease and desist orders prohibiting these Respondents from importing, marketing, advertising, demonstrating, sampling, warehousing inventory for distribution, offering for sale, selling, distributing, licensing, or using of any semiconductor chips

PUBLIC VERSION

that include memory controllers and/or peripheral interfaces and products containing said semiconductor chips that infringe any claim of the Asserted Patents. D. The Public Interest

No exceptional circumstances exist that would warrant preclusion of Rambuss requested remedial relief. The Commission is required to issue an exclusion order upon the finding of a Section 337 violation unless, after considering the effect of such exclusion upon the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, and United States consumers, it finds such articles should not be excluded from entry. 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1); see also Spansion, Inc. v. Intl Trade Commn, 629 F.3d 1331, 1358-60 (Fed. Cir. 2010). The Commission has found public interest considerations to outweigh the statutorily mandated exclusion order only three times before, and all in cases prior to the 1988 legislative amendment removing the requirement that a patentee show irreparable harm. Spansion, 629 F.3d at 1359-60. There are no public interest considerations that would preclude entry of remedial orders in this Investigation. There will be no impact on public health, safety, and welfare. Nor is the availability of the accused products a concern, because Rambuss many paying licensees could meet U.S. consumer demand. There is no evidence of any statutory public interest factor here, especially given the large number of licensees Rambus has. The remaining Respondents have not identified any.2 Non-party Hynix submitted a statement purportedly addressing the public interest on March 26, 2012, but failed to address a single statutory public interest factor in its submission.

Certain former Respondents submitted a letter with public interest comments in response to the Commissions December 2, 2010 Notice. Those Respondents have been terminated from this Investigation based on settlement agreements. No Respondent provided public interest comments in response to the Commissions March 6, 2012 Notice of Request for Statements on the Public Interest. 9

PUBLIC VERSION

As set forth in Rambuss response, Hynixs submission had no relation to the public interest, and was merely a litigation-induced self-serving statement. See Rambus Incs Motion for Leave to File Response to Non-Party Hynix Semiconductor Inc.s Statement Regarding Public Interest, Motion Docket No. 753-108 (April 16, 2012). The Commission is guided by the language of Section 337 in assessing the public interest and Hynix provided no legal basis for the Commission to deviate from it. Nor is Hynixs submission justified on its merits. The public interest is not served by allowing Hynix to subvert the public comment process, nor is it served by adopting the IDs spoliation findings as Hynix advocates, which would result in inconsistent decisions from the ITC. Denying the requested relief in this case would discourage investment in the development of technological innovations, which, in turn, would have a negative effect on competition in the marketplace. Certain Display Controllers and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-491/481, Commn Op. at 66 (Feb. 4, 2005). Indeed, the protection of U.S. intellectual property rights is a strong public interest in itself. Certain Baseband Processor Chips and Chipsets, Transmitter and Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control Chips, and Products Containing Same, Including Cellular Telephone Handsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-543, Commn Op. at 153-54 (June 19, 2007). Companies like Rambus, and the hundreds of engineers it employs, research, develop, and invent the patented technology that the U.S. economy needs, and protecting their intellectual property rights is in the public interest. III. THE APPROPRIATE BOND IS 100% OF ENTERED VALUE Section 337(j)(3) provides for the entry of infringing articles upon the payment of a bond during the 60-day Presidential review period. 19 U.S.C. 1337(j)(3). The bond is to be set at a level sufficient to offset any competitive advantage resulting from the unfair method of

10

PUBLIC VERSION

competition or unfair act enjoyed by persons benefiting from the importation. Certain Dynamic Random Access Memories, Components Thereof and Prods. Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA242, Commn Op. on Violation, Remedy, Bonding and the Public Interest, USITC Pub. No. 2034, 1987 WL 450856 at 38 (September 21, 1987). The ALJ recommended a bond to be set at a reasonable royalty rate of the entered value of the accused products. ID at 376. Rambus does not currently manufacture or sell products that compete with Respondents Accused Products, but its licensing domestic industry is based on its licensees being able to sell products that do compete with those products. Thus, it is appropriate for the Commission to set the bond at 100% of entered value. Any other bond, such as a reasonable royalty, would be manifestly unfair to Rambuss numerous legitimate licensees who have paid royalties for years while competing with the Respondents Accused Products. HTr. 1826, 1878-79. The ALJ disagreed, stating that a 100% bond would be punishing Respondents for past infringing acts. ID at 376. But such a bond would simply do what the statute envisionedprotect Rambus from further injury. There is nothing punitive about a 100% bond during the short period of Presidential Review. The ITC has ordered them numerous times to protect complainants, and should do the same here. Respondents argued for no bond, or no more than a reasonable royalty rate. RIB 298300. The Staff argued that a 2% rate is the appropriate rate. SIB 230-31. That rate, however, is based on a rate in a Rambus license that does not include the asserted Dally patents. Because this Investigation involves both the Dally and Barth I patents, any reasonable royalty would give the Dally patents essentially no value. Thus, the Staffs proposed 2% rate is too low and Rambuss proposed 100% rate appropriately protects Rambuss legitimate licensees.

11

PUBLIC VERSION

IV.

ADDITIONAL REQUESTED INFORMATION In response to the Commission Notice, Rambus provides the following additional

information: U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, and U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 expire on October 19, 2015. U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 and U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 expire on June 23, 2017. The HTSUS numbers under which the accused products are imported include the following: 8471.30.01, 8471.41.01, 8471.50.01, 8471.60.70, 8471.70.40, 8473.30.11,

8517.12.00, 8517.61.00, 8517.62.10, 8525.50.10, 8526, 8528.41.10, 8542.31.00, and 8542.39.0000. V. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Rambus submits that the appropriate remedy in this Investigation is a general exclusion order, or in the alternative, a limited exclusion order directed to all accused products of the named Respondents should be entered. In addition, the

Commission should issue cease and desist orders directed to the Respondents identified as having commercially significant inventory. No public interest factors weigh against the

appropriate remedy, and a bond of 100% should be entered during the period of Presidential Review.

12

PUBLIC VERSION

EXHIBIT A

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

GENERAL EXCLUSION ORDER

The Commission has determined that there is a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the unlawful importation, sale for importation and sale after importation of certain semiconductor chips and products containing same, which contain semiconductor chips made on or behalf of Respondents, and that infringe claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). Having reviewed the record in this investigation, including the written submissions of the parties, the Commission has made its determination on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is a general exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of semiconductor chips and products containing same that infringe the 405, 353, 109, 857, and 494 patents because they contain infringing semiconductor chips manufactured by or on behalf of Respondents, or their affiliated companies,

parents, subsidiaries, licensees, contractors, or other related business entities, or successors or assigns. The Commission has also determined that the appropriate form of relief includes cease and desist orders against five of the named Respondents: Respondents ASUS, Garmin, Hitachi, LSI, and Seagate. The Commission has further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d) do not preclude issuance of the general exclusion order or cease and desist orders, and that the bond shall be in the amount of 100% of the entered value of semiconductor chips and products containing same that are subject to this Order during the Presidential review period. Accordingly, the Commission hereby ORDERS THAT: 1. Semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of

claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494, that contain infringing semiconductor chips manufactured by or on behalf of Respondents, or any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns, are excluded from entry for consumption into the United States, entry for consumption from a foreign-trade zone, or withdrawal from a warehouse for consumption, for the remaining term of the patents, except under license of the patent owner or as provided by law. 2. Products that are excluded by paragraph 1 of this Order are entitled to entry for

consumption into the United States, entry for consumption from a foreign-trade zone, or

withdrawal from a warehouse for consumption, under bond in the amount of 100% of the entered value pursuant to subsection (j) of the section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S. C. 1337(j), and the Presidential Memorandum for the United States Trade Representative of 2 July 21, 2005 (70 Fed. Reg. 43251) from the day after this Order is received by the United States Trade Representative, until such time as the United States Trade Representative notifies the Commission that this Order is approved or disapproved but, in any event, not later than sixty (60) days after the date of receipt of this Order. 3. At the discretion of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB) and pursuant to

procedures it establishes, persons seeking to import semiconductor chips and products containing same that are potentially subject to this Order may be required to certify that they are familiar with the terms of this Order, that they have made appropriate inquiry, and thereupon state that, to the best of their knowledge and belief, the products being imported are not excluded from entry under paragraph 1 of this Order. At its discretion, CBP may require persons who have provided the certification described in this paragraph to furnish such records or analyses as are necessary to substantiate the certification. 4. In accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1337(l), the provisions of this Order shall not

apply to semiconductor chips and products containing same that are imported by and for the use of the United States, or imported for, and to be used for, the United States with the authorization or consent of the Government. 5. The Commission may modify this Order in accordance with the procedures

described in Rule 210.76 of the Commission Rules of Practice. 19 C.F.R. 210.76.

6.

The Secretary shall serve copies of this Order upon each party of record in this

investigation and upon the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and CBP. 7. Notice of this Order shall be published in the Federal Register.

By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June __, 2012

EXHIBIT B

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

LIMITED EXCLUSION ORDER

The Commission has determined that there is a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the unlawful importation, sale for importation and sale after importation by respondents Asustek Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer International, Inc., (collectively ASUS); Cisco Systems, Inc.; Garmin International, Inc.; Hewlett-Packard Co.; Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, LSI Corporation; Seagate Technology LLC; STMicroelectronics NV, and STMicroelectronics Inc., of certain semiconductor chips and products containing same that infringe claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). Having reviewed the record in this investigation, including the written submissions of the parties, the Commission has made its determination on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is a limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of semiconductor chips and products containing

same that infringe the 405, 353, 109, 857, and 494 patents and are manufactured by or on behalf of Respondents, or their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, licensees, contractors, or other related business entities, or successors or assigns. The Commission has also determined that the appropriate form of relief includes cease and desist orders against five of the named Respondents: Respondents ASUS, Garmin, Hitachi, LSI, and Seagate. The Commission has further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d) do not preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist orders, and that the bond shall be in the amount of 100% of the entered value of semiconductor chips and products containing same that are subject to this Order during the Presidential review period. Accordingly, the Commission hereby ORDERS THAT: 1. Semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of

claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of the 857 patent, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of the 494 patent that are manufactured by or on behalf of, or imported by or on behalf of Respondents, or any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns, are excluded from entry for consumption into the United States, entry for consumption from a foreign-trade zone, or withdrawal from a warehouse for consumption, for the remaining term of the patents, except under license of the patent owner or as provided by law.

2.

Products that are excluded by paragraph 1 of this Order are entitled to entry for

consumption into the United States, entry for consumption from a foreign-trade zone, or withdrawal from a warehouse for consumption, under bond in the amount of 100% of the entered value pursuant to subsection (j) of the section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S. C. 1337(j), and the Presidential Memorandum for the United States Trade Representative of 2 July 21, 2005 (70 Fed. Reg. 43251) from the day after this Order is received by the United States Trade Representative, until such time as the United States Trade Representative notifies the Commission that this action is approved or disapproved but, in any event, not later than sixty (60) days after the date of receipt of this action. 3. At the discretion of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB) and pursuant to

procedures it establishes, persons seeking to import semiconductor chips and products containing same that are potentially subject to this Order may be required to certify that they are familiar with the terms of this Order, that they have made appropriate inquiry, and thereupon state that, to the best of their knowledge and belief, the products being imported are not excluded from entry under paragraph 1 of this Order. At its discretion, CBP may require persons who have provided the certification described in this paragraph to furnish such records or analyses as are necessary to substantiate the certification. 4. In accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1337(1), the provisions of this Order shall not

apply to semiconductor chips and products containing same that are imported by and for the use of the United States, or imported for, and to be used for, the United States with the authorization or consent of the Government. 5. The Commission may modify this Order in accordance with the procedures

described in Rule 210.76 of the Commission Rules of Practice. 19 C.F.R. 210.76.

6.

The Secretary shall serve copies of this Order upon each party of record in this

investigation and upon the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and CBP. 7. Notice of this Order shall be published in the Federal Register.

By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June __, 2012

EXHIBIT C

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Hitachi Global Storage Technologies cease and desist from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: importing, selling,

marketing, advertising, distribution, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. I. As used in this Order: (A) Commission shall mean the United States International Trade Commission. (B) Complainant shall mean Rambus Inc. of 1050 Enterprise Way, Suite 700, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. (C) Respondent means Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, 3403 Yerba Buena Road, San Jose, CA 95135. Definitions

(D) Person shall mean an individual, or any non-governmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, successors, or assigns. (E) United States shall mean the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (F) The terms import and importation refer to importation for entry for consumption under the Customs laws of the United States. (G) The term covered products shall mean semiconductor chips having synchronous dynamic random access memory controllers and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494. II. Applicability

The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and to any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licensees, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and majority-owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section III, infra, for, with, or otherwise on behalf of Respondent. III. Conduct Prohibited

The following conduct of Respondent in the United States is prohibited by the Order. For the remaining term of the respective patents, Respondent shall not: (A) import or sell for importation into the United States covered products;

(B) market, distribute, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise transfer (except for exportation), in the United States imported covered products; (C) advertise imported covered products in the United States; (D) solicit U.S. agents or distributors for imported covered products; or (E) aid or abet other entities in the importation, sale for importation, sale after importation, transfer, or distribution of covered products. IV. Conduct Permitted

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Order, specific conduct otherwise prohibited by the terms of this Order shall be permitted if, in a written instrument, the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494 licenses or authorizes such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States. V. Reporting

For purposes of this reporting requirement, the reporting periods shall commence on September 1 of each year and shall end on the subsequent August 31. However, the first report required under this section shall cover the period from the date of issuance of this Order through August 31, 2012. This reporting requirement shall continue in force until such time as

Respondent will have truthfully reported, in two consecutive timely filed reports, that it has no inventory of covered products in the United States. Within thirty (30) days of the last day of the reporting period, Respondent shall report to the Commission the quantity in units and the value in dollars of covered products that Respondent has imported or sold in the United States after importation during the reporting period and the quantity in units and value in dollars of reported covered products that remain in inventory in the United States at the end of the reporting period. 3

VI.

Record-keeping and Inspection

(A) For the purpose of securing compliance with this Order, Respondent shall retain any and all records relating to the sale, offer for sale, marketing, or distribution in the United States of covered products, made and received in the usual and ordinary course of business, whether in detail or in summary form, for a period of three (3) years from the close of the fiscal year to which they pertain. (B) For the purpose of determining or securing compliance with this Order and for no other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission, upon reasonable written notice by the Commission or its staff, shall be permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondents principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other representatives if Respondent so choose, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subparagraph VI(A) of this Order. Any failure to make the requited report or the filing of any false or inaccurate report shall constitute a violation of this Order, and the submission of a false or inaccurate report may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice as a possible criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. VII. Service of Cease and Desist Order

Respondent is ordered and directed to: (A) Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the effective date of this Order, a copy of this

Order upon each of its respective officers, directors, managing agents, agents, and employees who have any responsibility for the importation, marketing, distribution, or sale of imported covered products in the United States;

(B)

Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the succession of any persons referred to in

subparagraph VII (A) of this Order, a copy of the Order upon each successor; and (C) Maintain such records as will show the name, title, and address of each person

upon whom the Order has been served, as described in subparagraphs VII(A) and VII(B) of this Order, together with the date on which service was made. The obligations set forth in subparagraphs VII(B) and VII(C) shall remain in effect until the date of expiration of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494, whichever is later. VIII. Confidentiality Any request for confidential treatment of information obtained by the Commission pursuant to Sections V and VI of this Order should be in accordance with Commission Rule 201.6, 19 C.F.R. 201.6. For all reports for which confidential treatment is sought, Respondent must provide a public version of such report with confidential information redacted. IX. Enforcement

Violation of this Order may result in any of the actions specified in section 210.75 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.75, including an action for civil penalties in accordance with section 337(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337(f), and any other action as the Commission may deem appropriate. In determining whether Respondent is in violation of this Order, the Commission may infer facts adverse to Respondent if Respondent fails to provide adequate or timely information. X. Modification

The Commission may amend this Order on its own motion or in accordance with the procedure described in section 210.76 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.76.

XI.

Bonding

The conduct prohibited by Section III of this Order may be continued during the sixty (60) day period in which this Order is under review by the United States Trade Representative as delegated by the President, 70 Fed Reg 43251 (July 21, 2005), subject to Respondent posting a bond of in the amount of 100% of the per unit entered value of the covered products. This bond provision does not apply to conduct that is otherwise permitted by Section IV of this Order. Covered products imported on or after the date of issuance of this order are subject to the entry bond as set forth in the limited exclusion order issued by the Commission, and are not subject to this bond provision. The bond is to be posted in accordance with the procedures established by the Commission for the posting of bonds by complainants in connection with the issuance of temporary exclusion orders. See Commission Rule 210.68, 19 C.F.R. 210.68. The bond and any accompanying documentation is to be provided to and approved by the Commission prior to the commencement of conduct which is otherwise prohibited by Section III of this Order. The bond is to be forfeited in the event that the United States Trade Representative approves, or does not disapprove within the review period, this Order, unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a final judgment, reverses any Commission final determination and order as to Respondent on appeal, or unless Respondent exports the products subject to this bond or destroys them and provides certification to that effect satisfactory to the Commission. The bond is to be released in the event the United States Trade Representative disapproves this Order and no subsequent order is issued by the Commission and approved, or not disapproved, by the United States Trade Representative, upon service on Respondent of an

order issued by the Commission based upon application therefore made by Respondent to the Commission. By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June ___, 2012

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT ASUS Computer International Inc. and ASUStek Computer, Inc. cease and desist from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distribution, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. I. As used in this Order: (A) Commission shall mean the United States International Trade Commission. (B) Complainant shall mean Rambus Inc. of 1050 Enterprise Way, Suite 700, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. Definitions

(C) Respondent means ASUStek Computer Inc., 15 Li Te Road, Taipei City, 11259, Taiwan, and its wholly-owned subsidiary ASUS Computer International, Inc., 800 Corporate Way, Fremont, CA 94539. (D) Person shall mean an individual, or any non-governmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, successors, or assigns. (E) United States shall mean the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (F) The terms import and importation refer to importation for entry for consumption under the Customs laws of the United States. (G) The term covered products shall mean semiconductor chips having synchronous dynamic random access memory controllers and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494. II. Applicability

The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and to any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licensees, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and majority-owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section III, infra, for, with, or otherwise on behalf of Respondent.

III.

Conduct Prohibited

The following conduct of Respondent in the United States is prohibited by the Order. For the remaining term of the respective patents, Respondent shall not: (A) import or sell for importation into the United States covered products; (B) market, distribute, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise transfer (except for exportation), in the United States imported covered products; (C) advertise imported covered products in the United States; (D) solicit U.S. agents or distributors for imported covered products; or (E) aid or abet other entities in the importation, sale for importation, sale after importation, transfer, or distribution of covered products. IV. Conduct Permitted

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Order, specific conduct otherwise prohibited by the terms of this Order shall be permitted if, in a written instrument, the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494 licenses or authorizes such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States. V. Reporting

For purposes of this reporting requirement, the reporting periods shall commence on September 1 of each year and shall end on the subsequent August 31. However, the first report required under this section shall cover the period from the date of issuance of this Order through August 31, 2012. This reporting requirement shall continue in force until such time as

Respondent will have truthfully reported, in two consecutive timely filed reports, that it has no inventory of covered products in the United States.

Within thirty (30) days of the last day of the reporting period, Respondent shall report to the Commission the quantity in units and the value in dollars of covered products that Respondent has imported or sold in the United States after importation during the reporting period and the quantity in units and value in dollars of reported covered products that remain in inventory in the United States at the end of the reporting period. VI. Record-keeping and Inspection

(A) For the purpose of securing compliance with this Order, Respondent shall retain any and all records relating to the sale, offer for sale, marketing, or distribution in the United States of covered products, made and received in the usual and ordinary course of business, whether in detail or in summary form, for a period of three (3) years from the close of the fiscal year to which they pertain. (B) For the purpose of determining or securing compliance with this Order and for no other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission, upon reasonable written notice by the Commission or its staff, shall be permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondents principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other representatives if Respondent so choose, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subparagraph VI(A) of this Order. Any failure to make the requited report or the filing of any false or inaccurate report shall constitute a violation of this Order, and the submission of a false or inaccurate report may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice as a possible criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. VII. Service of Cease and Desist Order

Respondent is ordered and directed to: 4

(A)

Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the effective date of this Order, a copy of this

Order upon each of its respective officers, directors, managing agents, agents, and employees who have any responsibility for the importation, marketing, distribution, or sale of imported covered products in the United States; (B) Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the succession of any persons referred to in

subparagraph VII (A) of this Order, a copy of the Order upon each successor; and (C) Maintain such records as will show the name, title, and address of each person

upon whom the Order has been served, as described in subparagraphs VII(A) and VII(B) of this Order, together with the date on which service was made. The obligations set forth in subparagraphs VII(B) and VII(C) shall remain in effect until the date of expiration of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494, whichever is later. VIII. Confidentiality Any request for confidential treatment of information obtained by the Commission pursuant to Sections V and VI of this Order should be in accordance with Commission Rule 201.6, 19 C.F.R. 201.6. For all reports for which confidential treatment is sought, Respondent must provide a public version of such report with confidential information redacted. IX. Enforcement

Violation of this Order may result in any of the actions specified in section 210.75 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.75, including an action for civil penalties in accordance with section 337(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337(f), and any other action as the Commission may deem appropriate. In determining whether Respondent is in violation of this Order, the Commission may infer facts adverse to Respondent if Respondent fails to provide adequate or timely information. 5

X.

Modification

The Commission may amend this Order on its own motion or in accordance with the procedure described in section 210.76 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.76. XI. Bonding

The conduct prohibited by Section III of this Order may be continued during the sixty (60) day period in which this Order is under review by the United States Trade Representative as delegated by the President, 70 Fed Reg 43251 (July 21, 2005), subject to Respondent posting a bond of in the amount of 100% of the per unit entered value of the covered products. This bond provision does not apply to conduct that is otherwise permitted by Section IV of this Order. Covered products imported on or after the date of issuance of this order are subject to the entry bond as set forth in the limited exclusion order issued by the Commission, and are not subject to this bond provision. The bond is to be posted in accordance with the procedures established by the Commission for the posting of bonds by complainants in connection with the issuance of temporary exclusion orders. See Commission Rule 210.68, 19 C.F.R. 210.68. The bond and any accompanying documentation is to be provided to and approved by the Commission prior to the commencement of conduct which is otherwise prohibited by Section III of this Order. The bond is to be forfeited in the event that the United States Trade Representative approves, or does not disapprove within the review period, this Order, unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a final judgment, reverses any Commission final determination and order as to Respondent on appeal, or unless Respondent exports the products subject to this bond or destroys them and provides certification to that effect satisfactory to the Commission. 6

The bond is to be released in the event the United States Trade Representative disapproves this Order and no subsequent order is issued by the Commission and approved, or not disapproved, by the United States Trade Representative, upon service on Respondent of an order issued by the Commission based upon application therefore made by Respondent to the Commission. By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June ___, 2012

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Garmin International, Inc. cease and desist from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distribution, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. I. As used in this Order: (A) Commission shall mean the United States International Trade Commission. (B) Complainant shall mean Rambus Inc. of 1050 Enterprise Way, Suite 700, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. (C) Respondent means Garmin International, Inc., 1200 E. 151st Street, Olathe, Kansas 66062. Definitions

(D) Person shall mean an individual, or any non-governmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, successors, or assigns. (E) United States shall mean the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (F) The terms import and importation refer to importation for entry for consumption under the Customs laws of the United States. (G) The term covered products shall mean semiconductor chips having synchronous dynamic random access memory controllers and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494. II. Applicability

The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and to any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licensees, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and majority-owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section III, infra, for, with, or otherwise on behalf of Respondent. III. Conduct Prohibited

The following conduct of Respondent in the United States is prohibited by the Order. For the remaining term of the respective patents, Respondent shall not: (A) import or sell for importation into the United States covered products;

(B) market, distribute, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise transfer (except for exportation), in the United States imported covered products; (C) advertise imported covered products in the United States; (D) solicit U.S. agents or distributors for imported covered products; or (E) aid or abet other entities in the importation, sale for importation, sale after importation, transfer, or distribution of covered products. IV. Conduct Permitted

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Order, specific conduct otherwise prohibited by the terms of this Order shall be permitted if, in a written instrument, the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494 licenses or authorizes such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States. V. Reporting

For purposes of this reporting requirement, the reporting periods shall commence on September 1 of each year and shall end on the subsequent August 31. However, the first report required under this section shall cover the period from the date of issuance of this Order through August 31, 2012. This reporting requirement shall continue in force until such time as

Respondent will have truthfully reported, in two consecutive timely filed reports, that it has no inventory of covered products in the United States. Within thirty (30) days of the last day of the reporting period, Respondent shall report to the Commission the quantity in units and the value in dollars of covered products that Respondent has imported or sold in the United States after importation during the reporting period and the quantity in units and value in dollars of reported covered products that remain in inventory in the United States at the end of the reporting period. 3

VI.

Record-keeping and Inspection

(A) For the purpose of securing compliance with this Order, Respondent shall retain any and all records relating to the sale, offer for sale, marketing, or distribution in the United States of covered products, made and received in the usual and ordinary course of business, whether in detail or in summary form, for a period of three (3) years from the close of the fiscal year to which they pertain. (B) For the purpose of determining or securing compliance with this Order and for no other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission, upon reasonable written notice by the Commission or its staff, shall be permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondents principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other representatives if Respondent so choose, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subparagraph VI(A) of this Order. Any failure to make the requited report or the filing of any false or inaccurate report shall constitute a violation of this Order, and the submission of a false or inaccurate report may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice as a possible criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. VII. Service of Cease and Desist Order

Respondent is ordered and directed to: (A) Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the effective date of this Order, a copy of this

Order upon each of its respective officers, directors, managing agents, agents, and employees who have any responsibility for the importation, marketing, distribution, or sale of imported covered products in the United States;

(B)

Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the succession of any persons referred to in

subparagraph VII (A) of this Order, a copy of the Order upon each successor; and (C) Maintain such records as will show the name, title, and address of each person

upon whom the Order has been served, as described in subparagraphs VII(A) and VII(B) of this Order, together with the date on which service was made. The obligations set forth in subparagraphs VII(B) and VII(C) shall remain in effect until the date of expiration of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494, whichever is later. VIII. Confidentiality Any request for confidential treatment of information obtained by the Commission pursuant to Sections V and VI of this Order should be in accordance with Commission Rule 201.6, 19 C.F.R. 201.6. For all reports for which confidential treatment is sought, Respondent must provide a public version of such report with confidential information redacted. IX. Enforcement

Violation of this Order may result in any of the actions specified in section 210.75 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.75, including an action for civil penalties in accordance with section 337(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337(f), and any other action as the Commission may deem appropriate. In determining whether Respondent is in violation of this Order, the Commission may infer facts adverse to Respondent if Respondent fails to provide adequate or timely information. X. Modification

The Commission may amend this Order on its own motion or in accordance with the procedure described in section 210.76 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.76.

XI.

Bonding

The conduct prohibited by Section III of this Order may be continued during the sixty (60) day period in which this Order is under review by the United States Trade Representative as delegated by the President, 70 Fed Reg 43251 (July 21, 2005), subject to Respondent posting a bond of in the amount of 100% of the per unit entered value of the covered products. This bond provision does not apply to conduct that is otherwise permitted by Section IV of this Order. Covered products imported on or after the date of issuance of this order are subject to the entry bond as set forth in the limited exclusion order issued by the Commission, and are not subject to this bond provision. The bond is to be posted in accordance with the procedures established by the Commission for the posting of bonds by complainants in connection with the issuance of temporary exclusion orders. See Commission Rule 210.68, 19 C.F.R. 210.68. The bond and any accompanying documentation is to be provided to and approved by the Commission prior to the commencement of conduct which is otherwise prohibited by Section III of this Order. The bond is to be forfeited in the event that the United States Trade Representative approves, or does not disapprove within the review period, this Order, unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a final judgment, reverses any Commission final determination and order as to Respondent on appeal, or unless Respondent exports the products subject to this bond or destroys them and provides certification to that effect satisfactory to the Commission. The bond is to be released in the event the United States Trade Representative disapproves this Order and no subsequent order is issued by the Commission and approved, or not disapproved, by the United States Trade Representative, upon service on Respondent of an

order issued by the Commission based upon application therefore made by Respondent to the Commission. By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June ___, 2012

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT LSI Corporation cease and desist from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distribution, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. I. As used in this Order: (A) Commission shall mean the United States International Trade Commission. (B) Complainant shall mean Rambus Inc. of 1050 Enterprise Way, Suite 700, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. (C) Respondent means LSI Corporation, 1621 Barber Lane, Milpitas, CA 95035. Definitions

(D) Person shall mean an individual, or any non-governmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, successors, or assigns. (E) United States shall mean the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (F) The terms import and importation refer to importation for entry for consumption under the Customs laws of the United States. (G) The term covered products shall mean semiconductor chips having synchronous dynamic random access memory controllers and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494. II. Applicability

The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and to any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licensees, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and majority-owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section III, infra, for, with, or otherwise on behalf of Respondent. III. Conduct Prohibited

The following conduct of Respondent in the United States is prohibited by the Order. For the remaining term of the respective patents, Respondent shall not: (A) import or sell for importation into the United States covered products;

(B) market, distribute, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise transfer (except for exportation), in the United States imported covered products; (C) advertise imported covered products in the United States; (D) solicit U.S. agents or distributors for imported covered products; or (E) aid or abet other entities in the importation, sale for importation, sale after importation, transfer, or distribution of covered products. IV. Conduct Permitted

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Order, specific conduct otherwise prohibited by the terms of this Order shall be permitted if, in a written instrument, the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494 licenses or authorizes such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States. V. Reporting

For purposes of this reporting requirement, the reporting periods shall commence on September 1 of each year and shall end on the subsequent August 31. However, the first report required under this section shall cover the period from the date of issuance of this Order through August 31, 2012. This reporting requirement shall continue in force until such time as

Respondent will have truthfully reported, in two consecutive timely filed reports, that it has no inventory of covered products in the United States. Within thirty (30) days of the last day of the reporting period, Respondent shall report to the Commission the quantity in units and the value in dollars of covered products that Respondent has imported or sold in the United States after importation during the reporting period and the quantity in units and value in dollars of reported covered products that remain in inventory in the United States at the end of the reporting period. 3

VI.

Record-keeping and Inspection

(A) For the purpose of securing compliance with this Order, Respondent shall retain any and all records relating to the sale, offer for sale, marketing, or distribution in the United States of covered products, made and received in the usual and ordinary course of business, whether in detail or in summary form, for a period of three (3) years from the close of the fiscal year to which they pertain. (B) For the purpose of determining or securing compliance with this Order and for no other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission, upon reasonable written notice by the Commission or its staff, shall be permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondents principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other representatives if Respondent so choose, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subparagraph VI(A) of this Order. Any failure to make the requited report or the filing of any false or inaccurate report shall constitute a violation of this Order, and the submission of a false or inaccurate report may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice as a possible criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. VII. Service of Cease and Desist Order

Respondent is ordered and directed to: (A) Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the effective date of this Order, a copy of this

Order upon each of its respective officers, directors, managing agents, agents, and employees who have any responsibility for the importation, marketing, distribution, or sale of imported covered products in the United States;

(B)

Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the succession of any persons referred to in

subparagraph VII (A) of this Order, a copy of the Order upon each successor; and (C) Maintain such records as will show the name, title, and address of each person

upon whom the Order has been served, as described in subparagraphs VII(A) and VII(B) of this Order, together with the date on which service was made. The obligations set forth in subparagraphs VII(B) and VII(C) shall remain in effect until the date of expiration of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494, whichever is later. VIII. Confidentiality Any request for confidential treatment of information obtained by the Commission pursuant to Sections V and VI of this Order should be in accordance with Commission Rule 201.6, 19 C.F.R. 201.6. For all reports for which confidential treatment is sought, Respondent must provide a public version of such report with confidential information redacted. IX. Enforcement

Violation of this Order may result in any of the actions specified in section 210.75 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.75, including an action for civil penalties in accordance with section 337(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337(f), and any other action as the Commission may deem appropriate. In determining whether Respondent is in violation of this Order, the Commission may infer facts adverse to Respondent if Respondent fails to provide adequate or timely information. X. Modification

The Commission may amend this Order on its own motion or in accordance with the procedure described in section 210.76 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.76.

XI.

Bonding

The conduct prohibited by Section III of this Order may be continued during the sixty (60) day period in which this Order is under review by the United States Trade Representative as delegated by the President, 70 Fed Reg 43251 (July 21, 2005), subject to Respondent posting a bond of in the amount of 100% of the per unit entered value of the covered products. This bond provision does not apply to conduct that is otherwise permitted by Section IV of this Order. Covered products imported on or after the date of issuance of this order are subject to the entry bond as set forth in the limited exclusion order issued by the Commission, and are not subject to this bond provision. The bond is to be posted in accordance with the procedures established by the Commission for the posting of bonds by complainants in connection with the issuance of temporary exclusion orders. See Commission Rule 210.68, 19 C.F.R. 210.68. The bond and any accompanying documentation is to be provided to and approved by the Commission prior to the commencement of conduct which is otherwise prohibited by Section III of this Order. The bond is to be forfeited in the event that the United States Trade Representative approves, or does not disapprove within the review period, this Order, unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a final judgment, reverses any Commission final determination and order as to Respondent on appeal, or unless Respondent exports the products subject to this bond or destroys them and provides certification to that effect satisfactory to the Commission. The bond is to be released in the event the United States Trade Representative disapproves this Order and no subsequent order is issued by the Commission and approved, or not disapproved, by the United States Trade Representative, upon service on Respondent of an

order issued by the Commission based upon application therefore made by Respondent to the Commission. By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June ___, 2012

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436

In the Matter of CERTAIN SEMICONDUCTOR CHIPS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME Investigation No. 337-TA-753

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Seagate Technology cease and desist from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distribution, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, semiconductor chips and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405 (the 405 patent), claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353 (the 353 patent), claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109 (the 109 patent), claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857 (the 857 patent) and claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494 (the 494 patent). in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. I. As used in this Order: (A) Commission shall mean the United States International Trade Commission. (B) Complainant shall mean Rambus Inc. of 1050 Enterprise Way, Suite 700, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. (C) Respondent means Seagate Technology, 920 Disc Drive, Scotts Valley, CA 95066. Definitions

(D) Person shall mean an individual, or any non-governmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, successors, or assigns. (E) United States shall mean the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. (F) The terms import and importation refer to importation for entry for consumption under the Customs laws of the United States. (G) The term covered products shall mean semiconductor chips having synchronous dynamic random access memory controllers and products containing same covered by one or more of claims 11-13, 15, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 6,470,405, one or more of claims 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,591,353, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 20, 21, and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 7,287,109, one or more of claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9-13, 24-28, 31-36, 39-44, 47, and 49-53 of U.S. Patent No. 7,602,857, one or more of claims 1-3, 6, 8, 25, 26, 30, 39, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,715,494. II. Applicability

The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and to any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licensees, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and majority-owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section III, infra, for, with, or otherwise on behalf of Respondent. III. Conduct Prohibited

The following conduct of Respondent in the United States is prohibited by the Order. For the remaining term of the respective patents, Respondent shall not: (A) import or sell for importation into the United States covered products;

(B) market, distribute, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise transfer (except for exportation), in the United States imported covered products; (C) advertise imported covered products in the United States; (D) solicit U.S. agents or distributors for imported covered products; or (E) aid or abet other entities in the importation, sale for importation, sale after importation, transfer, or distribution of covered products. IV. Conduct Permitted

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Order, specific conduct otherwise prohibited by the terms of this Order shall be permitted if, in a written instrument, the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494 licenses or authorizes such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States. V. Reporting

For purposes of this reporting requirement, the reporting periods shall commence on September 1 of each year and shall end on the subsequent August 31. However, the first report required under this section shall cover the period from the date of issuance of this Order through August 31, 2012. This reporting requirement shall continue in force until such time as

Respondent will have truthfully reported, in two consecutive timely filed reports, that it has no inventory of covered products in the United States. Within thirty (30) days of the last day of the reporting period, Respondent shall report to the Commission the quantity in units and the value in dollars of covered products that Respondent has imported or sold in the United States after importation during the reporting period and the quantity in units and value in dollars of reported covered products that remain in inventory in the United States at the end of the reporting period. 3

VI.

Record-keeping and Inspection

(A) For the purpose of securing compliance with this Order, Respondent shall retain any and all records relating to the sale, offer for sale, marketing, or distribution in the United States of covered products, made and received in the usual and ordinary course of business, whether in detail or in summary form, for a period of three (3) years from the close of the fiscal year to which they pertain. (B) For the purpose of determining or securing compliance with this Order and for no other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission, upon reasonable written notice by the Commission or its staff, shall be permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondents principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other representatives if Respondent so choose, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subparagraph VI(A) of this Order. Any failure to make the requited report or the filing of any false or inaccurate report shall constitute a violation of this Order, and the submission of a false or inaccurate report may be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice as a possible criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. VII. Service of Cease and Desist Order

Respondent is ordered and directed to: (A) Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the effective date of this Order, a copy of this

Order upon each of its respective officers, directors, managing agents, agents, and employees who have any responsibility for the importation, marketing, distribution, or sale of imported covered products in the United States;

(B)

Serve, within fifteen (15) days after the succession of any persons referred to in

subparagraph VII (A) of this Order, a copy of the Order upon each successor; and (C) Maintain such records as will show the name, title, and address of each person

upon whom the Order has been served, as described in subparagraphs VII(A) and VII(B) of this Order, together with the date on which service was made. The obligations set forth in subparagraphs VII(B) and VII(C) shall remain in effect until the date of expiration of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,602,857; and, 7,715,494, whichever is later. VIII. Confidentiality Any request for confidential treatment of information obtained by the Commission pursuant to Sections V and VI of this Order should be in accordance with Commission Rule 201.6, 19 C.F.R. 201.6. For all reports for which confidential treatment is sought, Respondent must provide a public version of such report with confidential information redacted. IX. Enforcement

Violation of this Order may result in any of the actions specified in section 210.75 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.75, including an action for civil penalties in accordance with section 337(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337(f), and any other action as the Commission may deem appropriate. In determining whether Respondent is in violation of this Order, the Commission may infer facts adverse to Respondent if Respondent fails to provide adequate or timely information. X. Modification

The Commission may amend this Order on its own motion or in accordance with the procedure described in section 210.76 of the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 C.F.R. 210.76.

XI.

Bonding

The conduct prohibited by Section III of this Order may be continued during the sixty (60) day period in which this Order is under review by the United States Trade Representative as delegated by the President, 70 Fed Reg 43251 (July 21, 2005), subject to Respondent posting a bond of in the amount of 100% of the per unit entered value of the covered products. This bond provision does not apply to conduct that is otherwise permitted by Section IV of this Order. Covered products imported on or after the date of issuance of this order are subject to the entry bond as set forth in the limited exclusion order issued by the Commission, and are not subject to this bond provision. The bond is to be posted in accordance with the procedures established by the Commission for the posting of bonds by complainants in connection with the issuance of temporary exclusion orders. See Commission Rule 210.68, 19 C.F.R. 210.68. The bond and any accompanying documentation is to be provided to and approved by the Commission prior to the commencement of conduct which is otherwise prohibited by Section III of this Order. The bond is to be forfeited in the event that the United States Trade Representative approves, or does not disapprove within the review period, this Order, unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a final judgment, reverses any Commission final determination and order as to Respondent on appeal, or unless Respondent exports the products subject to this bond or destroys them and provides certification to that effect satisfactory to the Commission. The bond is to be released in the event the United States Trade Representative disapproves this Order and no subsequent order is issued by the Commission and approved, or not disapproved, by the United States Trade Representative, upon service on Respondent of an

order issued by the Commission based upon application therefore made by Respondent to the Commission. By Order of the Commission.

James R. Holbein Secretary to the Commission Issued: June ___, 2012