Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP is presently Co-Lead Counsel in a class action lawsuit against the leading manufacturers of Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) chips or modules including Micron, Infineon, Hynix, Samsung, Nanya, Winbond, Elpida, NEC and Mosel-Vitelic. The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and is titled, In re Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litigation, No. M 02-1486, M.D.L. No. 1486 (N.D. Cal.). Plaintiffs allege that from April 1, 1999 through June 30, 2002 (the ?Class Period?), the defendants conspired, combined and contracted to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize the price at which DRAM was sold in the United States, and that as a result, those persons or entities who purchased DRAM from the defendants during the Class Period (the ?Class?) paid artificially inflated prices. Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification on December 9, 2005. The Court heard oral argument on the motion on May 17, 2006 and thereafter took the motion under submission. By order dated June 5, 2006, the Court granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
As of the beginning of April 2007, each of the defendants agreed to settle the claims against them. The total amount of the settlements is approximately $325 million. As of August 10, 2007, the Court has finally approved each of the settlements. The Court has also approved Class Counsel's application for attorneys fees as well as incentive awards to the Class Representatives. Class members who have already received notices will receive a notice of the plan of allocation as well as a proof of claim form. Copies of the settlement agreements and other pertinent documents can be found on the website, www.dramantitrustsettlement.com.
On Aug. 15, 2007, Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton of the Northern District of California said: ?I think I can conclude on the basis with my five years with you all, watching this litigation progress and seeing it wind to a conclusion, that the results are exceptional. The percentages . . . put this [case] in one of the upper categories of results of this kind of [antitrust] class action. I am aware of the complexity, both in terms of the substantive law that was at issue ? we had a lot of motions in this case, and I must say, no unnecessary motions -- I thought that you all did an exceptionally good job of bringing to me only those matters that really required the Court?s attention. You did an exceptionally good job at organizing and managing the case, assisting me in management of the case. There was excellent coordination between all the various different plaintiffs? counsel with your group and the other groups that are part of this litigation. You coordinated very well with defense counsel. Everyone has been extremely cooperative, given just the massive nature of this case. So my conclusion is the case was well litigated by both sides, well managed as well by both sides.?