Starboard Delivers Open Letter To Tessera Shareholders

            Starboard Delivers Open Letter To Tessera Shareholders

PR Newswire

NEW YORK, May 7, 2013

NEW YORK, May 7, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Starboard Value LP (together with its
affiliates, "Starboard"), one of the largest shareholders of Tessera
Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: TSRA) ("Tessera" or the "Company") with
approximately 7.7% of the outstanding common stock of the Company, announced
today that it has delivered an open letter to the shareholders of Tessera. In
the letter, Starboard addresses some of the recent misleading statements,
false allegations, and gross misrepresentations made by Tessera and provides
its views on the recent corporate governance manipulations carried out by the
Company. The full text of the letter is included below:

May 7, 2013

Dear Fellow Tessera Technologies Shareholders:

Vote the WHITE Proxy Card Today!

The 2013 Annual Meeting (the "Annual Meeting") of Tessera Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") is less than three weeks away. We appreciate the tremendous
support we continue to receive in this election contest. As shareholders,
collectively, we have an exciting opportunity to turn over a new leaf at
Tessera and elect a slate of extremely qualified director candidates who are
deeply committed to putting Tessera back on track for long-term value

Unfortunately, since the current board of directors (the "Board") does not
appear to believe it can win on the merits, the Company has resorted to a
series of desperate tactics aimed at misleading shareholders regarding our
nominees' plans for Tessera and further manipulating the corporate governance
mechanics. We believe the intentions of these actions are highly transparent
– the Board will say and do anything, regardless of its validity, to attempt
to sway your vote. We urge you not to be misled and to review the facts and
circumstances in making your voting decisions regarding the future leadership
of Tessera.

Remember, as one of the largest shareholders of Tessera, our interests are
directly aligned with yours. We have gone to great lengths to identify a
slate of highly qualified director candidates with substantial experience in
the business areas critical to Tessera. These nominees, in conjunction with
Starboard and its advisors, have developed a plan to stabilize, improve, and
drive significant long-term shareholder value creation at Tessera.

In this letter, we would like to directly address some of the recent
misleading statements, false allegations, and gross misrepresentations made by
Tessera and provide our views on the recent corporate governance manipulations
carried out by the Company. For additional information, you can also view our
recent in-depth Investor Presentation at

Tessera's IP Business: Non-Practicing Entity ("NPE"), Patent Troll, or "High
Technology" Company?

"Patent troll is a pejorative term used for a person or company that enforces
its patents against one or more alleged infringers in a manner considered
unduly aggressive or opportunistic, often with no intention to manufacture or
market the product. A related, less pejorative expression is non-practicing
entity (NPE) which describes a patent owner who does not manufacture or use
the patented invention." –

In his May 6^th open letter to shareholders, Interim CEO and Executive
Chairman Hill proclaims that Tessera is a "high technology company" and
specifically not a "patent troll". He largely bases this claim on the fact
that Tessera has historically spent significant resources in research and
development on new technologies. The reality is that Tessera owns patents and
generates revenues by licensing those patented technologies to other companies
who use the technology in their products. Tessera, itself, does not actually
make a product or use its inventions internally. The success of Tessera's IP
business is purely driven by its ability to license its inventions to outside
third parties. Therefore, most would characterize Tessera as an NPE. As
defined above, an NPE is "a patent owner who does not manufacture or use the
patented invention". "Patent troll" is merely a derogatory term to describe
an NPE.

Tessera is an NPE regardless of which slate ultimately wins this contest. Our
nominees' plan for Tessera is not to broadly change the type of company
Tessera is, but instead to ensure better execution of the business model to
drive significant improvements in the trajectory of revenue and profits. Mr.
Hill makes broad statements about Tessera's "Stellar Track Record of
Innovation". The reality is far different – revenues have been declining
rapidly, expenses have ballooned, and profits in the IP business have
continued to fall.

Tessera's Management and Board Do Not Recognize the Extent of the Company's

In the most recent letter published by the Company, the Company states:

"Starboard likes to continually confuse the performance of Tessera's IP
business with the poor performance of the Company's DigitalOptics investment,
which has been a drag on Tessera's performance over the last two years."

We are not confused about the following:

  oIn the past two years, revenue in the IP business has declined by 26.9%.
    In fact, the first quarter run rate of $25.6 million in IP revenues is
    down 34.3% year-over-year.
  oIn the past two years, operating income in the IP business has declined by
    54.1%. In fact, in the first quarter, the IP business actually lost $3.7
    million in operating income.
  oSince forming the Invensas subsidiary over two years ago, Tessera has not
    reported any revenue from this segment despite significant spending on
    research and development and patent acquisitions. In fact, 93% of
    Tessera's revenues still come from its legacy portfolio, Tessera Inc.,
    despite approximately two-thirds of Tessera's patents being held in the
    Invensas and DigitalOptics subsidiaries.

One of our biggest concerns with the current management team and Board is that
they, themselves, do not even recognize the magnitude of the problems at
Tessera. In the Company's latest letter, Mr. Hill references the Company's
five-year average operating margin of 54%, but conveniently fails to mention
that the IP business lost money last quarter and has been in dramatic
decline. How can management and the Board conveniently continue to ignore
such highly problematic performance statistics as if they did not exist? They
clearly believe that merely solving the issues with the DigitalOptics
business, which is by no means a forgone conclusion, is enough. Their
approach to the IP business is "business as usual." The reality is that
Tessera's IP business is in need of significant overhaul in order to correct
years of terrible financial performance.

Continued Rhetoric Regarding Unwired Planet is Unfounded

Instead of focusing on the issues at Tessera, the Company has repeatedly
attempted to distract shareholders with ridiculous comparisons to Unwired
Planet, another Starboard portfolio company. These two companies are
distinctly different. On the one hand, Tessera is a long-standing
intellectual property licensing company with substantial revenue and a
developed pipeline. On the other hand, Unwired Planet has just recently
completed a business model transformation to become a pure-play IP licensing
company. Unwired Planet is in the infancy of its new business model. Since I
became Chairman of the Board just over eighteen months ago, a great deal has
been accomplished – we successfully exited the money-losing and declining
product businesses, restructured the company and re-located the headquarters
to Nevada, and consummated a transaction with Ericsson that increased the size
of our patent holdings by more than ten times. It has been just five short
months since this transformation was completed and our management team is
highly focused on generating licensing revenues. As Tessera's management team
and Board should be acutely aware, a licensing effort takes time to develop
and mature - Tessera founded Invensas over two years ago and has yet to report
any licensing revenue despite the benefits of being owned by a well-known
entity in the intellectual property space.

While management and the Board continually lambast Unwired Planet's strategy,
they are employing similar ones:

  oJust like Unwired Planet, Tessera utilizes litigation as a tool to drive
    licensing revenue. In fact, Tessera has spent over $200 million in
    litigation expenses over the past six years. Currently Tessera has nine
    (9) legal actions on file.
  oJust like Unwired Planet, Tessera has acquired patents and is actively
    considering industry partnerships to attract additional patent assets.
  oJust like Unwired Planet, many of the patented technologies at Tessera
    were developed in-house through proprietary research and development.

Tessera's attempt to discredit the progress at Unwired Planet is just a
desperate attempt to distract shareholders from the key issues facing the
Company. Instead of focusing on presenting solutions to Tessera's problems,
management and the Board are quick to take credit for the recent stock price
performance of Tessera. Ask yourself the following:

  oIs it a coincidence that all of the recent positive changes at Tessera
    took place after Starboard nominated a slate of directors?
  oIs it a coincidence that Tessera's stock price has outperformed since our
    involvement but underperformed over almost any other time period?

The Board's Latest Actions are Another Example of Tessera's Willingness to
Continually Manipulate the Corporate Machinery at Shareholders' Expense

Ever since we first became involved at Tessera approximately eighteen months
ago, the Company has manipulated annual meeting dates and nomination deadlines
to prevent shareholders, and Starboard specifically, from seeking to change
the composition of the Board. First, upon learning of our involvement in late
2011, the Company intentionally triggered an immediate ten-day nomination
deadline by accelerating the date of the 2012 annual meeting by more than two
months. Then, when the Company realized we were likely going to be nominating
a slate for this year's annual meeting, the Company chose to delay the 2013
annual meeting by close to two months to buy itself additional time. The
current Board is now proving that it is no different than its predecessors in
how it is manipulating the voting mechanics at the upcoming Annual Meeting.

Prior to mailing its proxy materials to shareholders and soliciting proxies in
connection with the Annual Meeting, the Board took action on March 2, 2013 to
reduce the size of the Board from eight (8) persons to six (6) persons. Now
with less than three weeks remaining until the Annual Meeting, the Board has
flip-flopped and unilaterally expanded the number of board seats that will be
open for election at the Annual Meeting by two seats. Given the tremendous
support we have received thus far, the practical implication of this action is
to guarantee that a minimum of two of the Company's nominees are elected to
the Board.

Management and the Board did not stop there. They also proposed that we
consent to allow the Company to use a new form of proxy card that would change
the fundamental mechanics of this election contest at this very late stage in
the game and after both Starboard and the Company have spent significant time
and resources to print and mail their respective proxy materials. Our proxy
materials and the Company's proxy materials were filed, reviewed, amended, and
cleared by the SEC. Any new materials and voting mechanics have not been
reviewed and cleared by the SEC. What the Company conveniently fails to tell
you is that if we agreed to the use of a new form of proxy card then all
current voting could be reset and shareholders who have already voted would
potentially be disenfranchised. We nominated our slate of candidates more than
four months ago back on December 21, 2012. If the Board were truly interested
in the good governance aspects of using a universal proxy card and not
furthering its own self-serving agenda, then why did the Board not propose
this months ago before both sides filed and mailed definitive proxies?
Clearly, this proposed use of a universal proxy card is not about good
governance or what is best for shareholders, but is instead just a desperate
ploy by the Board to reset all voting back to zero, further delay the Annual
Meeting, and confuse and frustrate shareholders in this election contest.

Our Nominees are Simply More Qualified to Oversee a Turnaround of Tessera

Our goal all along has been to reconstitute the Board with extremely
accomplished and independent individuals who have the requisite skill sets to
lead Tessera on a path to long-term success. After a two-month search process
using a tier one executive search firm, we identified a slate of candidates
with exceptional and relevant credentials. Quite frankly, our slate of six
director candidates is far better qualified to engineer a successful
turnaround than the Company's director nominees.

Our highly-qualified, non-Starboard nominees include:

Tudor Brown was one of the founding members and until May 2012, President and
Board Member of ARM Holdings plc, a publicly-traded, semiconductor IP and
software design company based in Cambridge, UK, where he served in various
positions over a career of more than twenty years. ARM Holdings plc currently
has a market value of nearly $20 billion and is one of the most successful
semiconductor IP licensing companies in the world. Prior to our search for
Tessera director candidates, Starboard had no previous relationship with Mr.

George Cwynar is the former President, Chief Executive Officer, and Board
Member of MOSAID Technologies Incorporated, a Canadian-based leading designer
and licensor of memory technology, and supplier of memory test systems to
major semiconductor companies worldwide. During his tenure at MOSAID, Mr.
Cwynar managed the delicate balance between intellectual property licensing
and product sales. He is uniquely positioned to understand the complications
Tessera faces by participating in both the semiconductor IP licensing business
and technology components business. Prior to our search for Tessera director
candidates, Starboard had no previous relationship with Mr. Cwynar.

Thomas Lacey previously served as the President of Flextronics International's
Components Division, now Vista Point Technologies, from which Tessera acquired
camera module manufacturing assets integral to its DOC business segment. Mr.
Lacey has a broad knowledge of the technology components business and is
uniquely qualified due to his specific knowledge of elements of Tessera's DOC
business. Earlier in his career, Mr. Lacey held various management and
executive positions at Intel Corporation for 13 years, including Vice
President Sales and Marketing, President of Intel Americas, and Vice President
and General Manager, Flash Products. Starboard initially met Mr. Lacey
through its investment in Phoenix Technologies, a former Starboard portfolio
company, where he was hired to be the CEO. Following the sale of Phoenix
Technologies, Starboard recommended Mr. Lacey for a board opportunity at a
current Starboard portfolio company, DSP Group. Mr. Lacey is a current
director of DSP Group.

George A. Riedel previously served in various positions with Nortel Networks
Corporation, where he led the sale/restructuring of various carrier and
enterprise business units, and later on, led the effort to monetize the
company's remaining 6,500 patents and patent applications, culminating in the
sale of its patent portfolio for $4.5 billion to a consortium which included
several of the leading technology companies in the world. This is one of the
largest single transactions for intellectual property ever completed. Prior to
our search for Tessera director candidates, Starboard had no previous
relationship with Mr. Riedel.

Donald E. Stout is a senior partner at the law firm of Antonelli, Terry, Stout
& Kraus, LLP, where his legal practice has involved all facets of intellectual
property licensing, litigation, and general patent work. Mr. Stout co-founded
NTP Inc., a very successful patent holding company for which he prepared the
original patents and managed its patent litigation strategy, and currently
serves as its Chief Strategist. Prior to our search for Tessera director
candidates, Starboard had no previous relationship with Mr. Stout.

We are not convinced that Tessera has the right plan and the right director
candidates to unlock value for shareholders. Not a single one of management's
nominees has run an intellectual property licensing business, has direct
background in imaging technology components, has experience in patent law, or
owns a material stake in the Company. One of management's nominees has served
on the Board for eight years and is responsible for overseeing years of
terrible performance and poor governance. Two other management nominees were
basically hand-picked from Mr. Hill's rolodex.

During settlement discussions, it became clear to us that Mr. Hill would not
agree to anything that did not leave him in absolute control. We would be
doing a grave disservice to shareholders by agreeing to any settlement that
involved the addition of only two of our highly qualified candidates. In good
faith, we have stated our nominees' willingness to consider adding back up to
two of management's nominees to the Board for the sake of continuity.

We do not view this contest as being about "incumbency" versus "dissident" or
"majority" versus "minority." This is a unique situation where only one
nominee on the Company's slate has actually ever been elected by the
shareholders. The rest are new directors who have been appointed to the Board
during the last twelve months. Whichever slate gets elected, the reality is
that a majority of the Board will be composed of new directors. Therefore,
this contest should really be about which group of director nominees is most
qualified to lead Tessera based on their credentials, relevance to Tessera's
businesses, and track records of success in this industry.

Our interests are directly aligned with yours and we continue to believe that
there is significant value to be realized at Tessera. We greatly appreciate
the support we have received so far and we urge all shareholders to support
our nominees at the Annual Meeting so together we can put Tessera back on
track for long-term value creation.



We look forward to your support at the Annual Meeting.

 Best Regards,

 Peter A. Feld
 Managing Member
 Starboard Value

If you have any questions, or require assistance with your vote, please
contact Okapi Partners LLC toll- free at (877) 869-0171 or email:

About Starboard Value LP

Starboard Value LP is a New York-based investment adviser with a focused and
differentiated fundamental approach to investing in publicly traded U.S. small
cap companies. Starboard invests in deeply undervalued small cap companies and
actively engages with management teams and boards of directors to identify and
execute on opportunities to unlock value for the benefit of all shareholders.

Investor contacts:
Peter Feld, (212) 201-4878
Gavin Molinelli, (212) 201-4828

If you have any questions, require assistance with submitting yourWHITE proxy
card or need additional copies of the proxy materials, please contact:

Okapi Partners
Bruce H. Goldfarb/Patrick McHugh
(212) 297-0720

SOURCE Starboard Value LP

Press spacebar to pause and continue. Press esc to stop.