| NIALL E. LYNCH (State Bar No. 157959)
|
Original Filed March 22, 2006 |
NATHANAEL M. COUSINS (State Bar No. 177944)
MAY Y. LEE (State Bar No. 209366)
BRIGID S. BIERMANN (State Bar No. 231705)
Antitrust Division
U.S. Department of Justice
450 Golden Gate Avenue
Box 36046, Room 10-0101
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 436-6660
Attorneys for the United States
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
ELPIDA MEMORY, INC.
Defendant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Case No. CR 06-0059 (PJH)
|
PLEA AGREEMENT
The United States of America and ELPIDA MEMORY, INC. (the "Defendant"), a
corporation organized and existing under the laws of Japan, hereby enter into the following Plea
Agreement pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure:
RIGHTS OF DEFENDANT
- The Defendant understands its rights:
- to be represented by an attorney;
- to be charged by indictment;
- as a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Japan, to decline
to accept service of the Summons in this case, and to contest the jurisdiction of the
United States to prosecute this case against it in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California;
- to plead not guilty to any criminal charge brought against it;
- to have a trial by jury, at which it would be presumed not guilty of the
charge and the United States would have to prove every essential element of the charged
offense beyond a reasonable doubt for it to be found guilty;
- to confront and cross-examine witnesses against it and to subpoena
witnesses in its defense at trial;
- to appeal its conviction; and
- to appeal the imposition of sentence against it.
AGREEMENT TO PLEAD GUILTY AND WAIVE CERTAIN RIGHTS
- The Defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives the rights set out in Paragraph
1(b)-(g) above, including all jurisdictional defenses to the prosecution of this case, and agrees
voluntarily to consent to the jurisdiction of the United States to prosecute this case against it in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The Defendant also
knowingly and voluntarily waives the right to file any appeal, any collateral attack, or any other
writ or motion, including but not limited to an appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3742, that challenges the
sentence imposed by the Court if that sentence is consistent with or below the recommended
sentence in Paragraph 8 of this Plea Agreement, regardless of how the sentence is determined by
the Court. This Plea Agreement does not affect the rights or obligations of the United States as
set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3742(b) and (c). Further, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 7(b), the
Defendant will waive indictment and plead guilty at arraignment to a two-count Information to
be filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The
Information will charge the Defendant with one count of participating in a conspiracy in the
United States and elsewhere to suppress and eliminate competition by fixing the prices of
Dynamic Random Access Memory ("DRAM") to be sold to certain original equipment
manufacturers of personal computers and servers ("OEMs") from on or about April 1, 1999, to
on or about June 15, 2002, in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.
Additionally, the Information will charge the Defendant with a second count of participating in a
conspiracy to submit collusive, noncompetitive, and rigged bids to Sun Microsystems on a 1
Gigabyte Next-Generation Dual In-Line Memory Module ("1 GB NG DIMM") lot during a Sun
Microsystems auction on March 26, 2002.
- The Defendant, pursuant to the terms of this Plea Agreement, will plead guilty to
the criminal charges described in Paragraph 2 above and will make a factual admission of guilt
to the Court in accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, as set forth in Paragraph 4 below.
FACTUAL BASIS FOR OFFENSE CHARGED
- Had this case gone to trial, the United States would have presented evidence
sufficient to prove the following facts:
- For purposes of this Plea Agreement, the "Relevant Period" is that period
from on or about April 1, 1999 to on or about June 15, 2002. From April 1, 1999 until on
or about March 1, 2001, HITACHI, LTD. ("Hitachi") and NEC CORPORATION
("NEC"), corporations organized and existing under the laws of Japan, sold DRAM
products into various markets, including the U.S. market. On December 20, 1999,
Hitachi and NEC (collectively, the "Corporate Founders") formed Defendant, Elpida
Memory Inc. ("Elpida"), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Japan.
The Defendant has its headquarters and principal place of business in Tokyo, Japan.
Beginning on or about March 1, 2001, the Defendant sold DRAM products into various
markets, including the U.S. market.
- DRAM is the most commonly used semiconductor memory product.
DRAM provides high-speed storage and retrieval of electronic information in personal
computers, servers, and other devices. During the Relevant Period, the Defendant, or its
Corporate Founders, were producers of DRAM and were engaged in the sale of DRAM
in the United States and elsewhere and employed more than 200 employees. For
purposes of this Plea Agreement, "DRAM" means dynamic random access memory
semiconductor devices and modules, including synchronous dynamic random access
memory ("SDRAM"), double data rate dynamic random access memory ("DDR"), and
Rambus dynamic random access memory ("RDRAM") semiconductor devices and
modules. During the Relevant Period, the DRAM sales made by Defendant, and its
Corporate Founders, directly affected by the conspiracy, to OEMs in the United States
totaled $425 million in the aggregate. The sales during the Relevant Period directly
affected by the conspiracy were made as follows: NEC and Hitachi respectively sold
$209 million and $113 million of DRAM products from April 1, 1999 through February
28, 2001; and Elpida sold $103 million of DRAM products from March 1, 2001 through
June 15, 2002.
- For purposes of forming and carrying out the conspiracy charged in Count
One of the Information, during at least certain periods of time during the Relevant Period,
the Defendant, or its Corporate Founders, through certain of their respective officers and
employees, participated in a conspiracy in the United States and elsewhere among certain
DRAM producers, the primary purpose of which was to fix the price of DRAM sold to
certain OEMs. The conspiracy directly affected the following OEMs in the United
States: Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, Compaq Computer Corporation,
International Business Machines Corporation, Apple Computer Inc., and Gateway, Inc.
In furtherance of the conspiracy, the Defendant, or its Corporate Founders, through
certain of their respective officers and employees, engaged in discussions and attended
meetings with representatives of certain other DRAM producers and sellers. During
these discussions and meetings, agreements were reached to fix the price of DRAM to be
sold to certain OEMs.
- As to Count One, at certain times during the Relevant Period, DRAM
prices decreased significantly. Nevertheless, the Defendant, or its Corporate Founders,
and their coconspirators reached agreements to limit the rate of price declines, which
were achieved with varying levels of effectiveness. At certain other times, the
Defendant, or its Corporate Founders, and their coconspirators reached agreements on
price increases and were able to institute price increases on DRAM sales to certain
OEMs.
- For purposes of forming and carrying out the conspiracy charged in Count
Two of the Information, Defendant's employees had discussions and reached agreements
with employees of its coconspirator on how it would allocate and divide a bid offered by
Sun Microsystems in an auction on or about March 26, 2002. The Defendant and its
coconspirators submitted bid proposals to Sun Microsystems for a bid on a 1 GB NG
DIMM lot to achieve that result, including submitting complementary bids to ensure the
success of their agreement.
- During the Relevant Period, DRAM sold by one or more of the
conspirator firms, and equipment and supplies necessary to the sale of DRAM, as well as
payments for DRAM, traveled in interstate and foreign commerce. The business
activities of the Defendant, or its Corporate Founders, and their coconspirators in
connection with the sale of DRAM affected by this conspiracy were within the flow of,
and substantially affected, interstate and foreign trade and commerce.
- Acts in furtherance of these conspiracies were carried out within the
Northern District of California. DRAM affected by these conspiracies were sold by one
or more of the conspirators to OEMs in this District.
POSSIBLE MAXIMUM SENTENCE
- The Defendant understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be
imposed against it upon conviction for each count of a violation of Section One of the Sherman
Antitrust Act is a fine in an amount equal to the greatest of:
- $10 million (15 U.S.C. § 1);
- twice the gross pecuniary gain the conspirators derived from the crime (18
U.S.C. § 3571(c) and (d)); or
- twice the gross pecuniary loss caused to the victims of the crime by the
conspirators (18 U.S.C. § 3571(c) and (d)).
- In addition, the Defendant understands that:
- pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3561(c)(1), the Court may impose a term of
probation of at least one year, but not more than five years;
- pursuant to § 8B1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines
("U.S.S.G.," "Sentencing Guidelines," or "Guidelines"), 18 U.S.C. § 3563(b)(2) or
3663(a)(3), the Court may order it to pay restitution to the victims of the offense; and
- pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(B), the Court is required to order the
Defendant to pay a $400 special assessment upon conviction for each count of the
charged crime.
SENTENCING GUIDELINES
- The Defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory, not
mandatory, but that the Court must consider the Guidelines in effect on the day of sentencing,
along with the other factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), in determining and imposing
sentence. The Defendant understands that the Guidelines determinations will be made by the
Court by a preponderance of the evidence standard. The Defendant understands that although
the Court is not ultimately bound to impose a sentence within the applicable Guidelines range, its
sentence must be reasonable based upon consideration of all relevant sentencing factors set forth
in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8, the United States agrees that
self-incriminating information that the Defendant and its cooperating officers and employees
provide to the United States pursuant to this Plea Agreement will not be used to increase the
volume of affected commerce attributable to the Defendant or in determining the Defendant's
applicable Guidelines range, except to the extent provided in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8(b).
SENTENCING AGREEMENT
- Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C), the United States and the Defendant
agree that the appropriate disposition of this case is, and agree to recommend jointly that the
Court impose a sentence requiring the Defendant to pay to the United States a criminal fine of
$84 million, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3571(d) (the "Recommended Sentence"). The parties agree
that there exists no aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not
adequately taken into consideration by the U.S. Sentencing Commission in formulating the
Guidelines justifying a departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K2.0. The parties agree not to seek or
support any sentence outside of the Guidelines range nor any Guidelines adjustment for any
reason that is not set forth in this Plea Agreement. The parties further agree that the
Recommended Sentence set forth in this Plea Agreement is reasonable.
- The Defendant understands that the Court will order it to pay a $800
special assessment, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(B), in addition to any fine
imposed.
- The United States and the Defendant jointly submit that this Plea
Agreement, together with the record that will be created by the United States and the
Defendant at the plea and sentencing hearings, and the further disclosure described in
Paragraph 10, will provide sufficient information concerning the Defendant, the crime
charged in this case, and the Defendant's role in the crime to enable the meaningful
exercise of sentencing authority by the Court under 18 U.S.C. § 3553. The United States
and Defendant agree to request jointly that the Court accept the Defendant's guilty plea
and impose sentence on an expedited schedule as early as the date of arraignment, based
upon the record provided by the Defendant and the United States, under the provisions of
Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c)(1)(A)(ii), U.S.S.G. § 6A1.1, and Rule 32-1(b) of the U.S.D.C.
N.D. California Criminal Local Rules. The Court's denial of the request to impose
sentence on an expedited schedule will not void this Plea Agreement.
- The United States contends that had this case gone to trial, the United States
would have presented evidence to prove that the gain derived from or the loss resulting
from the charged offense is sufficient to justify the Recommended Sentence, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3571(d). For purposes of this plea and sentencing, the Defendant waives its
right to contest this calculation.
- The United States and the Defendant agree that the applicable Sentencing
Guidelines fine range exceeds the fine contained in the Recommended Sentence set out in
Paragraph 8 above. Subject to the full and continuing cooperation of the Defendant, as described
in Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, and prior to sentencing in this case, the United States
agrees that it will make a motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 8C4.1, for a downward departure from
the Guidelines fine range and will request that the Court impose the Recommended Sentence set
out in Paragraph 8 of this Plea Agreement because of the Defendant's substantial assistance in
the government's investigation and prosecution of violations of federal criminal law in the
DRAM industry.
- Subject to the ongoing, full, and truthful cooperation of the Defendant described
in Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, and before sentencing in the case, the United States will
fully advise the Court and the Probation Office as to: (i) the fact, manner, and extent of the
Defendant's cooperation and its commitment to prospective cooperation with the United States'
investigation and prosecutions; (ii) all material facts relating to the Defendant's involvement in
the charged offense; and (iii) all other relevant conduct.
- The United States and the Defendant understand that the Court retains complete
discretion to accept or reject the Recommended Sentence provided for in Paragraph 8 of this
Plea Agreement.
- If the Court does not accept the Recommended Sentence, the United States
and the Defendant agree that this Plea Agreement, except for Paragraph 11(b) below,
shall be rendered void.
- If the Court does not accept the Recommended Sentence, the Defendant
will be free to withdraw its guilty plea (Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(5) and (d)). If the
Defendant withdraws its guilty plea, this Plea Agreement, the guilty plea, and any
statement made in the course of any proceedings under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 regarding the
guilty plea or this Plea Agreement, or made in the course of plea discussions with an
attorney for the government, shall not be admissible against the Defendant in any
criminal or civil proceeding, except as otherwise provided in Fed. R. Evid. 410. In
addition, the Defendant agrees that if it withdraws its guilty plea pursuant to this
subparagraph of this Plea Agreement, the statute of limitations period for any offense
referred to in this Plea Agreement will be tolled for the period between the date of the
signing of this Plea Agreement and the date the Defendant withdrew its guilty plea or for
a period of sixty (60) days after the date of the signing of this Plea Agreement, whichever
period is greater
.
- In light of the civil class action cases filed against Defendant, including In re
DRAM Antitrust Litigation, No. M-02-1486PJH, MDL No. 1486, in the United States District
Court, Northern District of California, and DRAM Cases, No. CJC-03-004265, in the Superior
Court, San Francisco, California, which potentially provide for a recovery of a multiple of actual
damages, the United States agrees that it will not seek a restitution order for the offense charged
in the Information. The Defendant asserts that, the Defendant, by signing this Plea Agreement,
is not assuming the civil liability, if any, of its Corporate Founders.
DEFENDANT'S COOPERATION
- The Defendant and its subsidiaries that are engaged in the sale or production of
DRAM (collectively, "Related Entities") will cooperate fully and truthfully with the United
States in: (i) the prosecution of this case; (ii) the current federal investigation of violations of
federal antitrust and related criminal laws involving the production or sale of DRAM in the
United States and elsewhere; and (iii) any litigation or other proceedings arising or resulting
from any such investigation to which the United States is a party (collectively i-iii, "Federal
Proceeding"). The ongoing, full, and truthful cooperation of the Defendant shall include, but not
be limited to:
- producing to the United States all non-privileged documents, information,
and other materials (with translations into English), wherever located, in the possession,
custody, or control of the Defendant or any of its Related Entities, requested by the
United States in connection with any Federal Proceeding; and
- using its best efforts to secure the ongoing, full, and truthful cooperation,
as defined in Paragraph 14 of this Plea Agreement, of the current and former directors,
officers, and employees of the Defendant or any of its Related Entities as may be
requested by the United States but excluding Choei Matsushima, Osamu Fujiwara,
Akihiko Furusawa, Hiroshi Higuchi, and Dimitrios James ("Jim") Sogas including
making these persons available in the United States and at other mutually agreed-upon
locations, at the Defendant's expense, for interviews and the provision of testimony in
grand jury, trial, and other judicial proceedings in connection with any Federal
Proceeding.
- The ongoing, full, and truthful cooperation of each person described in Paragraph
13(b) above will be subject to the procedures and protections of this Paragraph, and shall
include, but not be limited to:
- producing in the United States and at other mutually agreed-upon
locations all non-privileged documents (with translations into English), including claimed
personal documents, and other materials, wherever located, requested by attorneys and
agents of the United States in connection with any Federal Proceeding;
- making himself or herself available for interviews in the United States and
at other mutually agreed-upon locations, not at the expense of the United States, upon the
request of attorneys and agents of the United States;
- responding fully and truthfully to all inquiries of the United States in
connection with any Federal Proceeding, without falsely implicating any person or
intentionally withholding any information, subject to the penalties of making false
statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) and obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503);
- otherwise voluntarily providing the United States with any non-privileged
material or information not requested in (a) - (c) of this Paragraph that he or she may
have that is related to any Federal Proceeding;
- when called upon to do so by the United States in connection with any
Federal Proceeding, testifying in grand jury, trial, and other judicial proceedings in the
United States fully, truthfully, and under oath, subject to the penalties of perjury (18
U.S.C. § 1621), making false statements or declarations in grand jury or court
proceedings (18 U.S.C. § 1623), contempt (18 U.S.C. §§ 401- 402), and obstruction of
justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503); and
- agreeing that, if the agreement not to prosecute him or her in this Plea
Agreement is rendered void under Paragraph 16(c), the statute of limitations period for
any Relevant Offense as defined in Paragraph 16(a) will be tolled as to him or her for the
period between the date of the signing of this Plea Agreement and six (6) months after
the date that the United States gave notice of its intent to void its obligations to that
person under the Plea Agreement.
GOVERNMENT'S AGREEMENT
- Upon acceptance of the guilty plea called for by this Plea Agreement and the
imposition of the Recommended Sentence, and subject to the cooperation requirements of
Paragraph 13 of this Plea Agreement, the United States agrees that it will not bring further
criminal charges against the Defendant or any Related Entities for any act or offense committed
before the date of this Plea Agreement that was undertaken in furtherance of an antitrust
conspiracy involving the production or sale of DRAM in the United States and elsewhere. The
nonprosecution terms of this Paragraph do not apply to civil matters of any kind, to any violation
of the federal tax or securities laws, or to any crime of violence.
- The United States agrees to the following:
- Upon the Court's acceptance of the guilty plea called for by this Plea
Agreement and the imposition of the Recommended Sentence and subject to the
exceptions noted in Paragraph 16(c), the United States will not bring criminal charges
against any current or former director, officer, or employee of the Defendant or its
Related Entities for any act or offense committed before the date of this Plea Agreement
and while that person was acting as a director, officer, or employee of the Defendant or
its Related Entities that was undertaken in furtherance of or related to an antitrust
conspiracy involving the production or sale of DRAM in the United States and
elsewhere, or undertaken in connection with any investigation of such a conspiracy
("Relevant Offense"), except that the protections granted in this Paragraph shall not
apply to Choei Matsushima, Osamu Fujiwara, Akihiko Furusawa, Hiroshi Higuchi, and
Dimitrios James ("Jim") Sogas;
- Should the United States determine that any current or former director,
officer, or employee of the Defendant or its Related Entities may have information
relevant to any Federal Proceeding, the United States may request that person's
cooperation under the terms of this Plea Agreement by written request delivered to
counsel for the individual (with a copy to the undersigned counsel for the Defendant) or,
if the individual is not known by the United States to be represented, to the undersigned
counsel for the Defendant;
- If any person requested to provide cooperation under Paragraph 16(b) fails
to comply with his or her obligations under Paragraph 14, then the terms of this Plea
Agreement as they pertain to that person, and the agreement not to prosecute that person
granted in this Plea Agreement, shall be rendered void;
- Except as provided in Paragraph 16(e), information provided by a person
described in Paragraph 16(b) to the United States under the terms of this Plea Agreement
pertaining to any Relevant Offense, or any information directly or indirectly derived from
that information, may not be used against that person in a criminal case, except in a
prosecution for perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1621), making a false statement or declaration
(18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, 1623), or obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503);
- If any person who provides information to the United States under this
Plea Agreement fails to comply fully with his or her obligations under Paragraph 14 of
this Plea Agreement, the agreement in Paragraph 16(d) not to use that information or any
information directly or indirectly derived from it against that person in a criminal case
shall be rendered void;
- The non-prosecution terms of this Paragraph do not apply to civil matters
of any kind, to any violation of the federal tax or securities laws, or to any crime of
violence; and
- Documents provided under Paragraphs 13(a) and 14(a) shall be deemed
responsive to outstanding grand jury subpoenas issued to the Defendant and/or any of its
Related Entities.
- The United States agrees that when any person travels to the United States for
interviews, grand jury appearances, or court appearances pursuant to this Plea Agreement, or for
meetings with counsel in preparation therefor, the United States will take no action, based upon
any Relevant Offense, to subject such person to arrest, detention, or service of process, or to
prevent such person from entering or departing the United States. This Paragraph does not apply
to an individual's commission of perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1621), making false statements (18 U.S.C.
§ 1001), making false statements or declarations in grand jury or court proceedings (18 U.S.C. §
1623), obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503), or contempt (18 U.S.C. §§ 401- 402) in
connection with any testimony or information provided or requested in any Federal Proceeding.
- The Defendant understands that it may be subject to administrative action by
federal or state agencies other than the United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division,
based upon the conviction resulting from this Plea Agreement, and that this Plea Agreement in
no way controls whatever action, if any, other agencies may take. However, the United States
agrees that, if requested, it will advise the appropriate officials of any governmental agency
considering such administrative action of the fact, manner, and extent of the cooperation of the
Defendant and its Related Entities, including the fact that the United States, pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 8C4.1, moved for a downward departure from the Guidelines fine range, as matters for that
agency to consider before determining what administrative action, if any, to take.
REPRESENTATION BY COUNSEL
- The Defendant has been represented by counsel and is fully satisfied that its
attorneys have provided competent legal representation. The Defendant has thoroughly
reviewed this Plea Agreement and acknowledges that counsel has advised it of the nature of the
charge, any possible defenses to the charge, and the nature and range of possible sentences.
VOLUNTARY PLEA
- The Defendant's decision to enter into this Plea Agreement and to tender a plea of
guilty is freely and voluntarily made and is not the result of force, threats, assurances, promises,
or representations other than the representations contained in this Plea Agreement. The United
States has made no promises or representations to the Defendant as to whether the Court will
accept or reject the recommendations contained within this Plea Agreement.
VIOLATION OF PLEA AGREEMENT
- The Defendant agrees that, should the United States determine in good faith,
during the period that any Federal Proceeding is pending, that the Defendant or any of its
Related Entities has failed to provide full and truthful cooperation, as described in Paragraph 13
of this Plea Agreement, or has otherwise violated any provision of this Plea Agreement, the
United States will notify counsel for the Defendant in writing by personal or overnight delivery
or facsimile transmission and may also notify counsel by telephone of its intention to void any of
its obligations under this Plea Agreement (except its obligations under this Paragraph), and the
Defendant and its Related Entities shall be subject to prosecution for any federal crime of which
the United States has knowledge including, but not limited to, the substantive offenses relating to
the investigation resulting in this Plea Agreement. The Defendant may seek Court review of any
determination made by the United States under this Paragraph to void any of its obligations
under this Plea Agreement. The Defendant and its Related Entities agree that, in the event that
the United States is released from its obligations under this Plea Agreement and brings criminal
charges against the Defendant or its Related Entities for any offense referred to in Paragraph 15
of this Plea Agreement, the statute of limitations period for such offense will be tolled for the
period between the date of the signing of this Plea Agreement and six (6) months after the date
the United States gave notice of its intent to void its obligations under this Plea Agreement.
- The Defendant understands and agrees that in any further prosecution of it or its Related Entities resulting from the release of the United States from its obligations
under this Plea Agreement, because of the Defendant's or its Related Entities' violation of this
Plea Agreement, any documents, statements, information, testimony, or evidence provided by it,
its Related Entities, or its current directors, officers, or employees of it or its Related Entities, to
attorneys or agents of the United States, federal grand juries, or courts, and any leads derived
therefrom, may be used against it or its Related Entities in any such further prosecution. In
addition, the Defendant unconditionally waives its right to challenge the use of such evidence in
any such further prosecution, notwithstanding the protections of Fed. R. Evid. 410.
ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT
- This Plea Agreement and the attached Joint Sentencing Memorandum between
the United States and Defendant constitute the entire agreement between the United States and
the Defendant concerning the disposition of the criminal charge in this case. This Plea
Agreement cannot be modified except in writing, signed by the United States and the Defendant.
- The undersigned is authorized to enter this Plea Agreement on behalf of the
Defendant ELPIDA MEMORY, INC. as evidenced by the Resolution of the Board of Directors
of the Defendant attached to, and incorporated by reference in, this Plea Agreement.
- The undersigned attorneys for the United States have been authorized
by the Attorney General of the United States to enter this Plea Agreement on behalf of the
United States.
- A facsimile signature shall be deemed an original signature for the purpose of
executing this Plea Agreement. Multiple signature pages are authorized for the purpose of
executing this Plea Agreement.
DATED: January 27, 2006
_______________/s/________________
Elpida Memory, Inc.
2-1, Yaesu 2-chome
Chuo-ku, Tokyo
Japan
|
_______________/s/________________
Niall E. Lynch, CA No. 157959
Nathanael M. Cousins, CA No. 177944
May Y. Lee, CA No. 209366
Brigid S. Biermann, CA No. 231705
Trial Attorneys
U.S. Department of Justice
Antitrust Division
450 Golden Gate Ave
Box 36046, Room 10-0101
San Francisco, CA 94102
Tel: (415) 436-6660
Fax: (415) 436-6687
|
_______________/s/________________
James G. Kreissman, CA No. 206740
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
3330 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Tel: (650) 251-5000
Fax: (650) 251-5002 |
|