Archived Cases - Infineon (New Jersey/California)

Hynix | Infineon(Texas) | Samsung | Infineon (NJ/California) | Promos(California)

DATE	DETAILS	SUPPORTING INFORMATION
April 5, 2007	Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit treats Micron's"notice of mootness" as a motion to voluntarily dismiss its appeal and grants the motion.	Read the Order
March 7, 2007	Judge Fogel issues an Order Dismissing All Remaining Claims And Counterclaims Pursuant to Parties' Stipulation and a Judgment, thereby dismissing the action with prejudice and ordering the Clerk of the Court to close the file.	Read the Order Read the Judgment
February 5, 2007	Judge Fogel issues Order Denying Joint Motion to Vacate, thereby denying MOSAID and Infineon's joint motion to vacate Judge Martini's summary judgment and Markman orders and leaving the matter of collateral estoppel (i.e., whether, in light of Judge Martini's Markman (claims construction) order, MOSAID is prevented from rearguing the same disputed claim terms in other cases) to be decided by the court in the Eastern District of Texas.	Read the Order
December 12, 2006	Judge Fogel issues an order rescheduling the December 22, 2006 hearing to February 2, 2007.	Read the Order
November 17, 2006	Micron files a Notice of Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit appealing the order denying Micron's motion to intervene as a matter of right in the action between MOSAID and Infineon and, alternatively, for permissive intervention.	Read the Notice
October 23, 2006	Judge Fogel issues an Order (1) Denying Motions of Micron and ProMOS to Intervene and Granting Alternative Motions to Appear as Amici Curiae; (2) Deferring Consideration of Joint Motion to Vacate; and (3) Setting Briefing Schedule and Further Argument on the Issue of Collateral Estoppel in which he concludes that Micron and ProMOS neither meet the requirements for intervention as of right nor the requirements for permissive intervention, but that they will be entitled to appear as amici curiae for the limited purposes of presenting arguments as to why the motion to vacate should not be granted.	Read the Order
August 3, 2006	Judge Fogel issues order granting Micron's unopposed motion to consider whether the Infineon v. MOSAID case and Micron v. MOSAID case are related, thereby finding that the cases are related and directing that the Micron case be reassigned from Judge Alsup to Judge Fogel.	Read the Order
July 20, 2006	U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issues an order granting the parties' joint motion for remand to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to permit consideration of the parties' joint request that the summary judgment and Markman orders be vacated.	Read the Order
June 14, 2006	MOSAID and Infineon Settle Patent Litigations	Read the News Release
April 11, 2006	U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issues Order granting the withdrawal of Infineon's cross-appeal.	Read the Order
March 17, 2006	Court of Appeals grants Motion of Jones Day to Withdraw as Counsel for Appellant MOSAID Technologies Incorporated.
January 23, 2006	Court of Appeals grants MOSAID's unopposed motion for a 60 day enlargement of time to file its principal brief.
December 15, 2005	MOSAID retains Donald Dunner of the firm Finnegan, Henderson as appellate co-counsel
November 25, 2005	MOSAID Files Notice of Appeal of Summary Judgement Ruling in Infineon Litigation	Read the News Release
October 27, 2005	Judge Fogel issued a Stipulation and Order Granting MOSAID Technologies Inc.'s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment Pursuant to Rule 54(b) and Staying Remaining Issues in Case (the "Stipulation"). In the Stipulation, MOSAID and Infineon agree that MOSAID can immediately appeal the Summary Judgment Order entered by the New Jersey Court on April 1, 2005, and postpone the remaining claims before Judge Fogel until such appeal is completed.	Read the Order
October 14, 2005	Infineon files its Opposition to MOSAID's Motion for Entry of Final Judgment Pursuant to Rule 54(b).	Read the Memorandum
September 20, 2005	Court orders that Scheduling Conference be moved from September 30th, 2005 to November 4th, 2005, the same day as the hearing on MOSAID's motion for Entry of Final Judgment.	Read the Order
August 29, 2005	MOSAID files its Notice of Motion for Entry of Final Judgment Pursuant to Rule 54(b) and the accompanying materials. If this motion is granted, MOSAID plans to immediately appeal the summary judgment ruling.	Read the Notice Read the Memorandum Read the Proposed Order
July 11, 2005	District Court Judge Martini issues an Order that sets out the documents which, as stipulated and agreed to by the parties, must be added to the record in order to reflect a complete record of the New Jersey proceedings prior to the case being remanded to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.	Read the Order
June 17, 2005	The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued a Conditional Remand Order remanding the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. As no objections were filed by either party subsequent to the Conditional Remand Order's original filing by the Judicial Panel on April 28, 2005, the action will be remanded.	Read the Order
April 28, 2005	The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation filed a Conditional Remand Order remanding the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.	Read the Order
April 6, 2005	Judge Martini requests that the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation remand the case to the United States District Court, Northern District of California.	Read the Order
April 4, 2005	Judge Martini issues summary judgment Order and Opinion.	Read the News Release Read the Order Read the Opinion
January 31, 2005	Magistrate Judge Hedges issues Order that no party shall use the Texas Instruments related documents produced by Infineon on December 9, 2004 to supplement any summary judgment papers or any expert reports.	Read the Order
January 18, 2005	Status Conference held. Judge Martini adjourns summary judgment motions hearings until February 8, 2005.
December 16, 2004	Magistrate Judge Hedges issues Order compelling the deposition of Infineon's expert Richard Roundtree.	Read the Order
November 16, 2004	Judge Martini orders the supplemental experts reports served by MOSAID on Infineon and Samsung on November 11, 2004, stricken from the record.	Read the Order
November 10, 2004	Magistrate Judge Hedges presides over a court imposed settlement conference between MOSAID and Infineon. (MOSAID typically does not note the various conferences that are requested or scheduled by the Court. To avoid confusion however, the recent 'Settlement Conference' listed on PACER as a Samsung related event, was, in fact, such a conference with Infineon.)
November 3, 2004	Judge Hedges issues Order granting MOSAID's request to admit Kenneth Adamo and Gregory Castanias, of the firm Jones Day, to appear on its behalf.	Read the Order
October 25, 2004	Judge Hedges issues Stipulation and Order permitting MOSAID and the Infineon parties to supplement their respective expert reports no later than October 29, 2004.	Read the Order
October 18, 2004	Judge Hedges issues scheduling order, setting Final Pretrial Conference for the MOSAID and Samsung parties for January 5, 2005.	Read the Order
October 12, 2004	Judge Hedges orders that, if necessary, the parties appear before him for an in person conference relating to Infineon's simulations on October 19, 2004. No such in person conference was required.	Read the Order
September 1, 2004	Magistrate Judge Hedges issues Order on consent granting Infineon's request to admit Gregory Arovas and Paul Bondor, of the firm Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, to appear on its behalf.	Read the Order
June 30, 2004	Hearing on Infineon discovery issues held	Order pending
June 15, 2004	Hearing held on MOSAID motion regarding Infineon discovery issues	Order pending
June 10, 2004	Court issues order and opinion regarding MOSAID's motion for limited reargument and clarification of the Markman ruling	Read the Opinion Read the Order
June 2-3, 2004	Hearing on discovery issues held.	Order Pending
May 21, 2004	MOSAID and Infineon Agree to Dismiss Claims Regarding Delay Locked Loop Patent	Read the News Release Read the Order
April 6, 2004	Status Conference held by teleconference before Magistrate Judge Hedges to deal with Infineon's objections to producing certain electronic information without restricted access. Magistrate Judge Hedges ruled that access to such electronic information be restricted only to MOSAID's law firm and an approved expert, and scheduled hearing for April 29th to deal with any further matters that arise pertaining to this issue.	Read the Order Read the Order
April 5, 2004	MOSAID has filed a Motion for Limited Reargument and Clarification of the Markman ruling issued by Judge William J. Martini on March 22, 2004. This Motion seeks to clarify and amend the definition of "double bootstrapping circuit" introduced by Judge Martini in his Markman Opinion. MOSAID also filed a motion for an order imposing sanctions against Samsung arising from its failure to deliver technical documentation related to its DRAM products.	Read the Notice of Motion Read the Motion Brief Read the News Release
March 23, 2004	Markman Order and Opinions issued in the cases against Samsung and Infineon.	Read the Order Read the Opinion Read the News Release
March 8, 2004	Hearing held to finalize the Order arising from the February 11, 2004 Status Conference. Magistrate Judge Hedges agreed with the form and content of the Order prepared by MOSAID, and rejected the timetable delays proposed by Infineon.	Read the Order
February 11, 2004	On February 11, 2004, a joint Status Conference was held before Magistrate Judge Hedges of the U.S. District Court for New Jersey to deal with the next steps in the Samsung and Infineon cases. In the Infineon case, the initial fact discovery deadline date is May 28, 2004. At a later date, the Infineon case will be transferred back to the Northern District of California for trial and certain other pre-trial proceedings. A number of additional scheduling issues may be addressed in the final Order of Magistrate Judge Hedges, which is still pending.	See entry for March 8, 2004
January 27 & 30, 2004	The consolidated Markman Hearing (patent claims construction hearing) in the Samsung and Infineon cases was held before Judge Martini of the U.S. District Court for New Jersey on Tuesday January 27th and Friday January 30th, 2004 (the original date of January 28th for the second hearing day was rescheduled due to inclement weather conditions in New Jersey). Counsel for MOSAID, Samsung and Infineon made extensive legal submissions during those two days which were in addition to the lengthy written briefs which had been filed earlier by all parties. Judge Martini has now reserved his decision in order to further consider those submissions and materials, but has not given the parties any firm indication of when he will deliver his final claims construction ruling. However, it is estimated that Judge Martini's ruling could be released within the next three months.	Awaiting Markman Hearing ruling of Judge Martini.
December 23, 2003	Judge Martini schedules pre-hearing conference for January 12, 2004 to consider procedural issues concerning the Markman Hearing scheduled for January 27 & 28, 2004.
November 6, 2003	Status Conference	Read the Order 1 Read the Order 2
November 3, 2003	MOSAID Adds Two New Patents to its Claims Against Samsung and Infineon.	Read the News Release
September 15, 2003	The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (MDL Panel) issues a Transfer Order assigning the Infineon v. MOSAID action in the Northern District of California to Judge William J. Martini of the District of New Jersey for "coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings" with the MOSAID v. Samsung action pending in New Jersey.	Read the Transfer Order
September 10, 2003	Judge Fogel issues agreed Order to reschedule the Case Management Conference and MOSAID's motion to further amend its Answer & Counterclaim from September 15, 2003 to a new date of October 20, 2003. (October 20, 2003 Case Management Conference cancelled due to transfer of this case to New Jersey -See Sept 15th entry above)	Read the Order
August 29, 2003	MOSAID files Reply to Infineon's Counter-Counterclaims.	Read the Reply to Infineon's Counter-Counter claims
August 11, 2003	MOSAID files a motion requesting the addition of two patents to its counterclaim against Infineon. The motion is scheduled to be heard on September 15, 2003 at 9:00 am.	Read the Notice of Motion and Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Counterclaims, etc.
August 8, 2003	Infineon delivers its Reply & Answer to Second Amended Counterclaim, and Related Counter-Counterclaim.	Read the Reply & Answer to Second Amended Counterclaim, and Related Counter-Counterclaim
July 11, 2003	MOSAID files Second Amended Answer and Counterclaim in response to the Amended Complaint of Infineon.	Read the Second Amended Answer and Counterclaim of MOSAID
June 23, 2003	Judge J. Fogel signs Stipulation and Initial Case Scheduling Order, as arising from April 21, 2003 Initial Case Management Conference. Next Case Management Conference set for July 28, 2003. Claims construction discovery to end by December 23, 2003. Markman Hearing scheduled for January 26, 2004.	Read the Stipulation and Order
June 23, 2003	Infineon files Amended Complaint, further to June 9, 2003 Order of Judge J. Fogel.	Read the Amended Complaint
June 12, 2003	Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation sets hearing date of July 24, 2003 to hear Infineon petition to combine the Infineon litigation with the Samsung litigation in the District Court for the Northern District of California.	Read the Notice
June 9, 2003	Judge J. Fogel grants in part MOSAID motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, with leave to Infineon to amend its pleadings.	Read the Order
May 30, 2003	MOSAID filed an amended claim against Infineon citing infringement of a new patent. This patent is US Patent Number 6,067,272 covering a Delay Locked Loop for use in Synchronous DRAM.	Read the Amended Answer and Counterclaim
May 5, 2003	The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation denies Infineon's request for an expedited hearing for its petition to consolidate the Samsung and Infineon cases.	Read the Order
March 24, 2003	Infineon Technologies AG (the German parent corporation of the Plaintiff) filed its Answer to the Counterclaim of MOSAID Technologies Incorporated.	Read the Answer
February 7, 2003	MOSAID filed its Answer and Counterclaims on seven MOSAID patents.	Read the Answer and Counterclaim
January 7, 2003	The District of Northern California Court stipulates that an answer or response by MOSAID to Infineon’s Complaint of December 11, 2002 is due February 7, 2003.	Read the Stipulation
December 11, 2002	Infineon files a Complaint in the United States District Court, Northern District of California seeking a declaratory judgment of patent noninfringement, invalidity and unenforceablity with respect to seven of MOSAID's United States patents.	Read the News Release Read the Complaint