AAPL » Topics » OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-K filed Oct 27, 2009.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing took place on November 26, 2008 and the Court issued its Markman ruling on December 5, 2008. On April 3, 2009, the Court ruled that the accused computers sold between 2005 and 2007 infringed the ’291 patent. A trial regarding validity, damages and willfulness commenced on April 17, 2009. On April 23, 2009, the jury returned a verdict that the patent was valid and willfully infringed, and awarded $19 million in damages. On May 1, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion for entry of judgment, including a request for enhanced damages based on the willfulness finding, seeking a total of $31 million plus attorneys’ fees. The Company has opposed that motion and has filed its own motions for judgment as a matter of law or, alternatively, for a new trial and/or remittitur, on the issues of validity, willfulness and damages. The Court has not entered a judgment and has not set hearing dates for any of the pending motions.

This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed Apr 23, 2009.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing took place on November 26, 2008 and the Court issued its Markman ruling on December 5, 2008. On April 3, 2009, the Court ruled that the accused computers sold between 2005 and 2007 infringed the ‘291 patent. The Company requested a ruling as a matter of law that the infringement was not willful, and the Court will issue a ruling on that motion before trial. Trial on the issues of invalidity and damages commenced on April 17, 2009.

 

42


This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed Jan 23, 2009.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing took place on November 26, 2008 and the Court issued its Markman ruling on December 5, 2008. Trial is scheduled for April 6, 2009.

This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-K filed Nov 5, 2008.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing is set for November 26, 2008, and trial is scheduled for April 6, 2009.

 

30


Table of Contents
This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed Jul 23, 2008.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing is set for November 26, 2008, and trial is scheduled for April 6, 2009.

This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed May 1, 2008.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing is set for November 26, 2008, and trial is scheduled for April 6, 2009.

This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed Feb 1, 2008.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity. The Markman hearing is set for November 26, 2008, and trial is scheduled for April 6, 2009.

These excerpts taken from the AAPL 10-K filed Nov 15, 2007.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled "Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses." The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of noninfringement and invalidity.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.



Plaintiff filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging
infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled "Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses." The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other
relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory
judgment of noninfringement and invalidity.



This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed Aug 8, 2007.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff OPTi Inc. filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.”  The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company filed an answer on April 17, 2007 denying all material allegations and asserting numerous affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims for declaratory judgment of noninfringement and invalidity.

35




This excerpt taken from the AAPL 10-Q filed May 10, 2007.

OPTi Inc. v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff OPTi Inc. filed this action against the Company on January 16, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,906, 5,813,036 and 6,405,291, all entitled “Predictive Snooping of Cache Memory for Master-Initiated Accesses.”  The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief.

36




Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki