Originally set to proceed in May but derailed by COVID-19, a third trial in VLSI Technology LLC’s multi-front, years-long battle against Intel commenced on November 7 in the Western District of Texas, District Judge Alan D. Albright presiding. The outcome of this week’s trial—a $949M jury verdict in VLSI’s favor—as well as a that of a 2021 trial between VLSI and Intel in the same venue, resulting in a $2.2B award for the NPE—sit in stark contrast to recent developments in the Delaware prong of VLSI’s campaign. There, litigation remains stalled as VLSI navigates Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly’s standing orders regarding corporate disclosure and third-party litigation funding.

In June, RPX queried why, in the Delaware prong of VLSI Technology LLC’s multi-front litigation against Intel, the NPE had yet to file corporate and third-party funding disclosures as required by District Judge Colm F. Connolly. Now, in reaction to VLSI’s subsequently filed—and “clearly inadequate”—disclosures, Judge Connolly has unsealed a declaration by the plaintiff’s CEO and also stayed the case until VLSI has complied with his standing order regarding disclosure statements.

On Monday, April 25, a jury was empaneled in the third West Texas trial between VLSI Technology LLC and Intel. However, that trial was soon knocked off course for a familiar reason. The following morning, District Judge Alan D. Albright indicated in a docket entry that he had been notified of positive COVID-19 tests among “multiple” attorneys—as a result, ending the trial, discharging the jury, and stating that a new trial would be “set for a later date”.

A third trial begins today in the Western District of Texas in the ever-widening set of disputes between VLSI Technology LLC and Intel. In the first half of 2021, a pair of Waco juries went in opposite directions, the first awarding VLSI $2.2B but the second turning away VLSI’s $3B damages ask. Since then, those dockets have seen furious storms of posttrial motions and orders from the court, most of them sealed. However, this past week District Judge Alan D. Albright made public a denial of Intel’s motion to amend its answer in the first case to assert a license defense based on the 2020 purchase of Finjan, Inc. by Fortress Investment Group LLC. Intel has contended, in multiple courts, that that acquisition gave rise to a license to all of Fortress’s patent holdings. In denying Intel’s motion, Judge Albright ruled, among other things, that the “proposed amendment would be futile because VLSI is not a party to the agreement”—but Judge Albright’s is unlikely to be the last word on this subject.

The battle between VLSI Technology LLC and Intel has heated up for a third time. In October 2017, VLSI Technology, an affiliate of Fortress Investment Group LLC, sued Intel in the Northern District of California (5:17-cv-05671) over eight patents, and in June 2018, the NPE opened up a second litigation front, suing Intel in the District of Delaware (1:18-cv-00966) over five more. Now, in the immediate wake of a mid-February order construing claims in California and an Intel motion to stay the California action in light of multiple instituted trials in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings—and after the Delaware court last year refused to transfer the case before it to California—VLSI Technology has hit Intel a second time in Delaware (1:19-cv-00426), this case asserting six more patents from the NPE’s sizable portfolio of assets originating principally with either Freescale, NXP, SigmaTel, or VLSI Technology, Inc. 

VLSI Technology LLC, an apparent affiliate of Fortress Investment Group LLC, has filed another case against Intel (1:18-cv-00966), this one in Delaware, asserting five more patents, of multiple subject matters and originating from either Freescale, NXP, SigmaTel, or VLSI Technology, Inc. The new suit follows an October 2017 complaint in the Northern District of California asserting eight patents against a large number of Intel microprocessors, including Core i3, i5, and i7; Xeon E3, E5, and E7; and Atom microprocessors, as well as Stratix 10 Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) and other products that incorporate Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge (“EMIB”) technology. Now also accused of infringement are Intel products (1) containing Intel On-Chip System Fabric technology, (2) with a Power Control Unit (PCU) to compensate for Inverse Temperature Dependence “in an infringing manner”, (3) with metal dummy lines to reinforce regions under bond pads “in an infringing manner”, (4) that include an “infringing Management Engine” and a CPU that includes a memory controller, and (5) that supply an output supply voltage to a power gated circuit “in an infringing manner”.

VLSI Technology LLC has filed suit against Intel (3:17-cv-05671), asserting eight patents received either directly from NXP or from Freescale, which NXP acquired in December 2015. The plaintiff, an apparent affiliate of Fortress Investment Group LLC, has targeted a large number of microprocessors, including Intel Core i3, i5, and i7; Xeon E3, E5, and E7; and Atom microprocessors, as well as Stratix 10 Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) and other products that incorporate Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge (“EMIB”) technology.