OMNIBUS ORDER

RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge.

This order addresses the admission of Plaintiff's Exhibit Nos. 383 and 384, Plaintiff's motions for judgment as a matter of law, and Defendant's motion for judgment of a matter of law.

A. Plaintiff's Exhibit Nos. 383 and 384

Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 383 is ADMITTED by stipulation of the parties. The Court will also ADMIT Plaintiff's Exhibit 384 (RFA Nos. 43-50) subject to redactions. The Court requires Plaintiff to redact the objections to Request for Admission Nos. 43-50, so that each response begins with: "SKHA states as follows. . . ."

B. Plaintiff's Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law

Plaintiff's moved for judgment as a matter of law on Day 9 of trial. Dkt. # 273. The Court rules as follows:

i. Breach of the Buffer Inventory

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Hynix on the issue of damages.

ii. Voluntary Payor Affirmative Defense

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Hynix on this issue.

iii. Impracticability Affirmative Defense

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Hynix on this issue.

iv. Pre-Incident Conduct

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Defendant, however, is precluded from referencing comparative fault or pre-incident conduct in closing arguments as a basis for reducing damages for breach of contract.

v. Subsequent Delivery of DRAM chips

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Hynix on that issue as it pertains to delivery under the Ninth Amendment.

vi. Breach of the Capacity Commitment (Table 3) of the Ninth Amendment

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Hynix on the issue of commercial reasonableness.

vii. Breach of Ninth Amendment Regarding Purchase Orders

Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Hynix on this issue.

C. Defendant's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law

Plaintiff's moved for judgment as a matter of law on Day 9 of trial. Dkt. # 273. The Court rules as follows:

i. Breach of Pricing Table of Ninth Amendment

Defendant's motion is DENIED. Disputed facts preclude finding that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for Cypress on this issue.