Northern District of California Judge Claudia Wilken denied a motion to decertify a class of direct purchasers of SRAM chips. The judge also denied in part and granted in part defendants’ motion for summary judgment for indirect purchaser claims.
Samsung argued in its motion for decertification that the direct purchasers lacked standing because the direct buyer’s lead representative did not purchase SRAM during the damages period. Rejecting that argument, Judge Wilken held that the evidence of collusion and price fixing, which covered the entire conspiracy period, was sufficient to maintain class certification, even though plaintiffs could only quantify damages for specified sub-periods.
The judge granted defendant’s summary judgment motion against indirect purchasers in Maine and Rhode Island on claims by the lead plaintiffs but not the classes. Furthermore, the lead plaintiff of Tennessee failed to prove that he had purchased a product containing SRAM during the conspiracy period and, the court therefore decertified that class.