EXHIBIT E-7Page 2344 UNITED STATES DISTRICT couRT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC. 6-00-2005 RM HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC., HYNIX ‘SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA SEMICONDUCTOR U.K. LTD. , AND HYNIX. SEMICONDUCTO! APRIL 6, 2006 DEUFSCHLAND GMBH, PLAINTIFES, VOLUME 14 PAGES 2344-2550 vs. RAMBUS, INC. DEFENDANT. TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE RONALD M. WHYTE ONITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. APPEARANCES: FOR THE PLAINTIFF: TOWNSEND 6 TOWNSEND & CREW BY: THEODORE G. BROWN, ITT, DANIEL J. FURNISS, AND’ JORDAN TRENT JONES 379 LYTTON AVENUE PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94301 ‘THELEN, REID @ PRIEST BY: “KENNETH L. NISSLY ANO ‘SUSAN VAN’ KEULEN 225 WEST SANTA CLARA STREET ‘SUITE 1200 ‘SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113 [APPEARANCES CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER: LEE-ANNE SHORTRIDGE, CSR, CAR CERTIFICATE NUMBER 9595 PETER TORREANO, CSR, CRR CERTIFICATE NUMBER 7623, EXHIBIT E-7Page 2345 [APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) FOR THE DEFENDANT: MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON BY: GREGORY P. STONE. 385 SOUTH GRAND AVE, 35TH FLOOR ‘LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071 BY: PETER A.DETRE {560 MISSION ST. 27TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94108 SIDLEY, AUSTIN, LLP BY: V. BRYAN MEDLOCK J. ‘717 NORTH HARWOOD, SUITE 3400 DALLAS, TEXAS 75201 DEWEY BALLANTINE BY: PIERRE HUBERT. 401 CONGRESS AVENUE, SUITE 3200 ‘AUSTIN, TEXAS. 78701 maa esis esr) Stina yh TURTHER RECROSS OY MR STONE 2505, FURTHER REDIRECT BYR NISSLY 308 Rogent Muruy URTHER REDIRECT BY MR. MEDLOCK. # 2516 NDexOF BouITS 2 (Pages 2345 to 2348) Page 2347 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA PROCEEDINGS (WHEREUPON, THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS \WERE HELD OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY’) THE COURT: GOOD MORNING DID SOMEONE HAVE SOMETHING THEY WANTED TO BRING UP? MR STONE: IDID, YOUR HONOR. 1JUST \WANTED TO RAISE THREE THINGS TO ALERT THE COURT [WE FILED -. WESENT LAST NIGHT AND THEN FILED THIS [MORNING A BRIEF WITH RESPECT TO THE MEMORANDUM ‘WRITTEN BY SB. KILL, EXHIBIT 521, WHICH WE PLAN ‘TO OFFER BASED ON THE FOUNDATION WE HAVE LAID FOR I WE PLAN TO OFFER THAT AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF OUR CASE AND IF THE COURT COULD IF WE COULD ARGUE THAT BEFORE WE CALL MR. CHUNG, TO THE EXTENT] “THE COURT THINKS THE CURRENT FOUNDATION FOR THAT DOCUMENT IS NOT SUFFICIENT, WE WOULD TRY TOLAY ADDITIONAL FOUNDATION WITH MR. CHUNG IF WE NEED TO, ‘ALTHOUGH ASIINDICATED IN THE MEMORANDUM, ‘SUSPECT WE CANNOT ELICIT ANY MORE USEFUL INFORMATION FROM MR. CHUNG ON THE RECORD EXCEPT ‘BUT WOULD CERTAINLY TRY IN ORDER TO DO WHATEVER (COULD IN ORDER TO REMEDY ANY ISSUES. ‘SOF ATSOME POINT WE COULD TRY 10 APRIL 6, 2006 Page 2348 [ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. HYNIX HAS RAISED ~ THATS ISSUE ONE. ISSUE TWO IS HYNIX HAS RAISED SOME COBIECTIONS TO EXHIBITS AND DEMONSTRATIVES TO BE USED WITH MGR MURPHY, AND I EXPECT, GIVEN THE PACE (OF TODAY, THAT MR. MURPHY WILL GET UPSOMETIME [BEFORE WE CONCLUDE TODAY ANDSO1 THINK WE OUGHT To} ‘ADDRESS THAT. {AND THEN THE THIRD ISSUEIS SENT YOU AND COUNSEL FOR HYNIX A COMPUTATION AS TOTHE TIME| [REMAINING BASED ON THE COURTS RECORDS, THE TIME ‘YOU GAVE THEM TO US, AND OUR RECORDS AFTER THAT, ‘AND IT MIGHT BE USEFUL TO KNOW, SINCE WERE COMING ‘TO THE END AND EVERYBODY 18 TRYING TO ALLOCATE ‘THEIR TIME, TO KNOW WHERE WESTAND. THOSE ARE MY ‘THREE ISSUES, THE COURT: THOSE ARE FAIR ENOUGH, MR. NISSLY: HAVEN'T LOOKED AT MY MAIL THIS MORNING, AND WHEN I LEFT, WHAT YOU [MENTIONED HAD NOT COME IN. MR. STONE: {THINK THATS RIGHT, YOUR HONOR, MR NISSLY. WE ALSO JUST RECEIVED OR RECEIVED SOME TIME LAST NIGHT, THES KILL MEMO (WERE CERTAINLY HAPPY TOTAKE A LOOK ATTHAT WE