Hewlett-Packard (HPQ)

Concluded Litigation

        Schorsch v. HP was a consumer class action filed against HP on October 28, 2003 in Illinois state court alleging that HP had included an electrically erasable programmable read only memory (EEPROM) chip in certain of its LaserJet printers that prematurely advises the user that the drum kit needs replacing in violation of Illinois state law. The plaintiffs subsequently filed an amended complaint seeking to expand the class from purchasers of drum kits to purchasers of all HP printer consumables that contain EEPROM chips. The plaintiffs sought certification of an Illinois-only class and unspecified damages, attorneys' fees and costs. The action was dismissed by the court with prejudice on December 20, 2008.

        CSIRO Patent Litigation. Microsoft Corporation, Hewlett-Packard Company, et al. v. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation of Australia is an action filed by HP and two other plaintiffs on May 9, 2005, in the District Court for the Northern District of California seeking a declaratory judgment against Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation of Australia ("CSIRO") that HP's products employing the IEEE 802.11a and 802.11g wireless protocol standards do not infringe CSIRO's United States Patent No. 5,487,069 relating to wireless transmission of data at frequencies in excess of 10GHz. On September 22, 2005, CSIRO filed an answer and counterclaims alleging that all HP products which employ those wireless protocol standards infringe the CSIRO patent and seeking damages, including enhanced damages and attorneys' fees and costs, and an injunction against sales of infringing products. On December 12, 2006, CSIRO successfully moved to have the case transferred to the District Court of the Eastern District of Texas. In March 2009, the parties agreed to settle the matter and dismiss the pending lawsuit. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, HP agreed to pay CSIRO an amount of money that is immaterial to HP in exchange for protection from claims of infringement of the patent at issue, including all United States and worldwide continuations and counterparts of that patent, in the form of a combination of licenses and covenants not to sue. The parties filed a stipulation dismissing the case on March 26, 2009.

48

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES

Notes to Consolidated Condensed Financial Statements (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Note 16: Litigation and Contingencies (Continued)

Concluded Litigation

        Schorsch v. HP was a consumer class action filed against HP on October 28, 2003 in Illinois state court alleging that HP had included an electrically erasable programmable read only memory (EEPROM) chip in certain of its LaserJet printers that prematurely advises the user that the drum kit needs replacing in violation of Illinois state law. The plaintiffs subsequently filed an amended complaint seeking to expand the class from purchasers of drum kits to purchasers of all HP printer consumables that contain EEPROM chips. The plaintiffs sought certification of an Illinois-only class and seeks unspecified damages, attorneys' fees and costs. The action was dismissed by the court with prejudice on December 20, 2008.