The Korean chip giant called a U.S. class action alleging collusion with SK hynix and Micron unfounded, while SK hynix said it is reviewing the complaint.
Visitors browse Samsung Electronics' booth during a trade show at Kintex in Goyang, Gyeonggi, on July 2, 2025. The product on display is a Double Data Rate 5 (DDR5) memory module.NEWS1
Samsung Electronics dismissed as "unfounded" the allegations in a U.S. class action suit accusing it, SK hynix and Micron of price-fixing, as memory producers come under growing pressure over soaring prices.
A group of U.S. consumers and businesses collectively sued the trio on Thursday over allegations of collusion and price-fixing in a California federal court.
The Korean chip giant immediately denied the allegation.
“The allegations raised in the complaint are unfounded. We operate our business in strict compliance with the principles of fair competition and relevant laws and regulations,” a spokesperson at Samsung Electronics said in a statement sent to the Korea JoongAng Daily.
“We will address this matter diligently through the appropriate legal process,” the spokesperson said.
SK hynix's 12-layer HBM4 memory chips on display at the SK AI Summit in Seoul on Nov. 3, 2025.YONHAP
SK hynix is currently reviewing the case.
“We are aware that the lawsuit has been filed,” a spokesperson at SK hynix said. “We are currently reviewing the complaint thoroughly and will respond appropriately after our review,” he said, without elaborating further.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, centers on rising prices of older commodity dynamic random access memory (DRAM) products, including Double Data Rate 3 and 4 chips, or DDR3 and DDR4, which the plaintiffs claim have jumped 700 percent over the past four years.
Alleging violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, the plaintiffs claim the memory companies collectively cut production and coordinated a shift toward high bandwidth memory and away from DDR3 and DDR4 products.
Still, industry and legal experts see that proving the allegations would be difficult unless the plaintiffs can present substantive evidence that the companies conspired to fix prices in advance.
Back in 2002, the Korean chipmakers, Micron and Germany’s Infineon faced a separate price-fixing investigation, but it was brought by U.S. antitrust authorities rather than private plaintiffs in a civil suit.
All of the companies pleaded guilty in 2004 through 2005, with Samsung paying a $300 million fine, SK hynix $185 million and Infineon $160 million. Micron avoided a fine after cooperating early with the investigation.
Antitrust cases brought by the Department of Justice generally proceed only after investigators have gathered evidence, unlike private civil lawsuits, which can be filed based on allegations.
A more comparable case is a class-action lawsuit filed in 2018, which accused Samsung Electronics, SK hynix and Micron of conspiring to restrict DRAM supply and inflate prices between 2016 and 2018.
However, the case was dismissed by a federal district court in 2022 after the court found the plaintiffs had failed to present sufficient evidence of an agreement among the companies.
If the court allows the case to proceed, it will enter the discovery phase, where the plaintiffs may seek internal documents, emails and other evidence to support their allegations of price-fixing.
