ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT FILE NO.: 54055CP
DATE: 2012-09-19

BETWEEN:

DAVID BRATTON
Plaintiff

– and –

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CANADA INC., HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA, INC., MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC., MICRON SEMICONDUCTOR CANADA, MICRON SEMICONDUCTOR PRODUCTS, INC., NEC CORPORATION, NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR, CORPORATION, CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR INC., ALLIANCE SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, ALLIANCE MEMORY, INC., FUJITSU LTD., FUJITSU CANADA, INC., FUJITSU AMERICA, INC., ETRON TECHNOLOGY AMERICA, INC., GSI TECHNOLOGY, INC., HITACHI LTD., HITACHI CANADA LTD., HITACHI AMERICA LTD., INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, IBM CANADA LTD., INTEGRATED DEVICE TECHNOLOGY, INC., INTEGRATED SILICON SOLUTION, INC., MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION, MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC SALES CANADA, INC., MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC & ELECTRONICS USA, INC., SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, EPSON CANADA, LIMITED, EPSON AMERICA, INC., EPSON ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., RENESAS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, RENESAS TECHNOLOGY CANADA LIMITED, RENESAS TECHNOLOGY AMERICA, INC., SHARP CORPORATION, SHARP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, SHARP ELECTRONICS OF CANADA LTD., SONY CORPORATION, SONY OF CANADA LTD., SONY CORPORATION OF AMERICA, SONY ELECTRONICS, INC., STMICROELECTRONICS N.V., STMICROELECTRONICS INC., TOSHIBA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA OF CANADA LIMITED, TOSHIBA AMERICA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA OF CANADA LIMITED, TOSHIBA AMERICA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA AMERICA ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS, INC., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA, INC.
Defendants

Harvey T. Strosberg, Q.C., for the Plaintiff

David Kent, for Micron Technology, Inc., Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc. and Micron Semiconductor Canada
Laura F. Cooper for Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba of Canada Limited, Toshiba America Corporation, Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc.
Michelle A. Rosenstock, for Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. and Samsung Electronics Canada Inc.

HEARD: September 14, 2012

Perell, J.

[ 1 ] This is a proposed class action under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 , S.O.1992, c. C.6.

[ 2 ] David Bratton sues Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., Samsung Electronics Canada Inc., Hynix Semiconductor, Inc., Hynix Seminconductor America, Inc., Micron Technology, Inc., Micron Semiconductor Canada, Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc., NEC Corporation, NEC Electronics America, Inc., Cypress Semiconductor, Corporation, Cypress Semicondutor Inc., Alliance Semiconductor Corporation, Alliance Memory, Inc., Fujitsu Ltd., Fujitsu Canada, Inc., Fujitsu America, Inc. Etron Technology America, Inc., GSI Technology, Inc., Hitachi Ltd., Hitachi Canada Ltd., Hitachi America Ltd., International Business Machines Corporation, IBM Canada Ltd., Integrated Device Technology, Inc., Integrated Silicon Solution, Inc., Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Mitsubishi Electric Sales Canada Inc., Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., Seiko Epson Corporation, Epson Canada, Limited, Epson America, Inc., Epson Electronics America, Inc., Renesas Technology Corporation, Renesas Technology Canada Limited, Renesas Technology America, Inc., Sharp Corporation, Sharp Electronics Corporation, Sharp Electronics of Canada Ltd., Sony Corporation, Sony of Canada Ltd., Sony Corporation of America, Sony Electronics, Inc. Stmicroelectronics N.V., Stmicroelectronics Inc., Stmicroelectronics, Inc., Toshiba Corporation, Toshiba of Canada Limited, Toshiba America Corporation, Toshiba of Canada Limited, Toshiba America Corporation, Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc., Winbond Electronics Corporation America, Inc.

[ 3 ] Mr. Bratton’s action relates to alleged price fixing in the Static Random Access Memory (“SRAM”) industry. Similar actions are proceeding concurrently in British Columbia and Quebec.

[ 4 ] Mr. Bratton pleads claims for: breach of Part VI of the Competition Act , R.S.C. 1985, c C-34; civil conspiracy; and, tortious interference with economic interests.

[ 5 ] A national settlement has been reached with Micron Technology, Inc., Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc. and Micron Semiconductor Canada, Inc. The settlement is subject to court approval in Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec. The litigation is continuing against the remaining defendants.

[ 6 ] Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Micron has agreed to pay CDN$300,000 for the benefit of Class Members. The settlement also obligates Micron to provide Mr. Bratton and the plaintiffs in the parallel proceedings with significant cooperation in the ongoing prosecution of the SRAM actions.

[ 7 ] The Micron Settlement Agreement stipulates an opt-out period of 60 days from the date of publication of notice, specifies the information which opt-out requests must include, and provides that class members who opt out at this stage shall be excluded from both the Micron Settlement Agreement and the ongoing SRAM Proceedings.

[ 8 ] The proposed class definition for the certification is:

All persons in Canada who purchased SRAM 1 or products which contained SRAM in the period from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2005, except the Excluded Persons 2 and persons who are included in the Quebec Settlement Class 3 and the BC Settlement Class. 4

1 SRAM means all types of static random access memory sold during the period January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2005, including, without limitation, high speed SRAM, low-powered SRAM, synchronous SRAM (including both Late Write and DDR synchronous SRAM), asynchronous SRAM (including asynchronous fast SRAM), pseudo SRAM (also known as PSRAM or mobile PSRAM), DDR SRAM, cellular RAM, and slow SRAM.

2 Excluded Person means each Defendant, the directors and officers of each Defendant, the subsidiaries or affiliates of each Defendant, the entities in which each Defendant or any of that Defendant's subsidiaries or affiliates have a controlling interest and the legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns of each of the foregoing, and persons who validly and timely opt out of the Proceedings.

3 Quebec Settlement Class means all (i) individuals in Quebec and (ii) legal persons resident in Quebec established for a private interest, partnership or association which had under its direction or control no more than 50 persons bound to it be a contract of employment who purchased SRAM or products which contained SRAM during the period January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2005, except the Excluded Persons.

4 BC Settlement Class means all persons resident in British Columbia who purchased SRAM or products which contained SRAM during the period January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2005, except the Excluded Persons.

[ 9 ] Mr. Bratton is a resident of Ontario. He purchased a Blackberry handheld device, containing SRAM during the relevant period. He is a Class Member within the proposed definition.

[ 10 ] The proposed common issue is:

Did the Settling Defendants conspire to fix, raise, maintain or stabilize the prices of, or allocate markets and customers for, SRAM directly or indirectly in Canada during the period from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2005?

[ 11 ] In this motion, Mr. Bratton seeks an order certifying the action as a class proceeding against Micron for settlement purposes only, setting a date for the hearing to seek settlement approval, approving notices in respect of the certification, and the notice plan, and setting the date for the settlement approval hearing.

[ 12 ] There was no opposition to the motion.

[ 13 ] Having reviewed the motion record, I am satisfied that all of the criteria for certification set out in s. 5 of the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 have been satisfied.

[ 14 ] I am satisfied that the notice and notice plan should be approved.

[ 15 ] Order to go.

Perell, J.

Released: September 19, 2012

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

DAVID BRATTON
Plaintiff

– and –

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CANADA INC., HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR, INC., HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA, INC., MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC., MICRON SEMICONDUCTOR CANADA, MICRON SEMICONDUCTOR PRODUCTS, INC., NEC CORPORATION, NEC ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR, CORPORATION, CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR INC., ALLIANCE SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, ALLIANCE MEMORY, INC., FUJITSU LTD., FUJITSU CANADA, INC., FUJITSU AMERICA, INC., ETRON TECHNOLOGY AMERICA, INC., GSI TECHNOLOGY, INC., HITACHI LTD., HITACHI CANADA LTD., HITACHI AMERICA LTD., INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, IBM CANADA LTD., INTEGRATED DEVICE TECHNOLOGY, INC., INTEGRATED SILICON SOLUTION, INC., MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION, MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC SALES CANADA, INC., MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC & ELECTRONICS USA, INC., SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, EPSON CANADA, LIMITED, EPSON AMERICA, INC., EPSON ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., RENESAS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, RENESAS TECHNOLOGY CANADA LIMITED, RENESAS TECHNOLOGY AMERICA, INC., SHARP CORPORATION, SHARP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, SHARP ELECTRONICS OF CANADA LTD., SONY CORPORATION, SONY OF CANADA LTD., SONY CORPORATION OF AMERICA, SONY ELECTRONICS, INC., STMICROELECTRONICS N.V., STMICROELECTRONICS INC., STMICROELECTRONICS INC., TOSHIBA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA OF CANADA LIMITED, TOSHIBA, TOSHIBA AMERICA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA OF CANADA LIMITED, TOSHIBA AMERICA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA AMERICA ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS, INC., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA, INC.
Defendants

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Perell, J.

Released: September 19, 2012