VLSI訴Intel系列案，在美國索賠超200億美元而在我國僅索賠130萬元

#本文由作者授權(quán)發(fā)布，不代表IPRdaily立場，未經(jīng)作者許可，禁止轉(zhuǎn)載#

來源：IPRdaily中文網(wǎng)（iprdaily.cn）

作者：肖振春 知識產(chǎn)權(quán)理想國

原標(biāo)題：VLSI訴Intel系列案，在美國索賠超200億美元而在我國僅索賠130萬元

據(jù)路透社報(bào)道，美東時(shí)間3月2日，美國得克薩斯州的聯(lián)邦陪審團(tuán)作出裁決，因侵犯了他人半導(dǎo)體制造專利權(quán)，英特爾(INTC.US)需向VLSI Technology LLC賠償21.75億美元（約合人民幣140.73億元），這也成為了美國歷史上規(guī)模最大的專利侵權(quán)賠償案之一。對此，英特爾表示將進(jìn)行上訴。

英特爾于2021年1月22日發(fā)布2020年財(cái)報(bào)，2020年總營收779億美元，凈利潤209億美元。一個(gè)月后，德克薩斯州西區(qū)聯(lián)邦地區(qū)法院（U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (WDTX)）的陪審團(tuán)裁定英特爾因?qū)＠謾?quán)需賠償VLSI合計(jì)21.75億美元，占其2020年凈利潤的約十分之一。

在英特爾2020年財(cái)報(bào)中對于其與VLSI之間的專利訴訟進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)說明，VLSI的索賠合計(jì)金額超過200億美元。最早訴訟發(fā)生2017年10月，涉及中美兩國法院，美國包括加州、特拉華州和德州三個(gè)聯(lián)邦地區(qū)法院，中國包括深圳中院和上海知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法院。

其中明確說明21.75億美元的兩個(gè)案件于2021年2月審理，以下為財(cái)報(bào)中英文原文并附簡單翻譯。

 
VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel

第一部分

VLSI在美國三地起訴Intel，索賠金額超過200億美元

In October 2017, VLSI Technology LLC (VLSI) filed a complaint against Intel in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California alleging infringement of eight patents acquired from NXP Semiconductors, N.V. (NXP). The patents, which originated at Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. and NXP B.V., are U.S. Patent Nos. 7,268,588; 7,675,806; 7,706,207; 7,709,303; 8,004,922; 8,020,014; 8,268,672; and 8,566,836. VLSI accuses various FPGA and processor products of infringement.

2017年10月，VLSI Technology LLC（VLSI）向美國加利福尼亞州北區(qū)地區(qū)法院提起訴訟，指控英特爾侵犯了其從NXP Semiconductors（NXP，恩智浦半導(dǎo)體）獲得的八項(xiàng)專利。這八件源自Freescale Semiconductor（飛思卡爾半導(dǎo)體），Inc.和NXPB.V.的專利是美國專利號7,268,588；7,675,806；7,706,207；7,709,303；8,004,922；8,020,014；8,268,672和8,566,836。VLSI指控各種FPGA和處理器產(chǎn)品侵權(quán)。

VLSI estimated its damages to be as high as $7.1 billion, and its complaint further sought enhanced damages, future royalties, attorneys' fees, costs, and interest. In May, June, September, and October 2018, Intel filed IPR petitions challenging the patentability of claims in all eight of the patents in-suit.

VLSI估計(jì)其損失高達(dá)71億美元，并且其訴訟進(jìn)一步尋求增加損害賠償，未來特許權(quán)使用費(fèi)，律師費(fèi)，成本和利息。在2018年5月，6月，9月和10月，英特爾提交了多方復(fù)審（Inter Partes Review，IPR）請?jiān)笗?，對涉案的這8項(xiàng)專利的權(quán)利要求可專利性進(jìn)行了挑戰(zhàn)。

The PTAB instituted review of six patents and denied institution on two patents. As a result of the institution decisions, the parties stipulated to stay the District Court action in March 2019. In December 2019 and February 2020, the PTAB found all claims of the '588 and '303 patents, and some claims of the '922 patent, to be unpatentable.

PTAB（專利審查與上訴委員會(huì)）啟動(dòng)過了對六項(xiàng)專利的復(fù)審，并拒絕了兩項(xiàng)專利的復(fù)審查。根據(jù)該機(jī)構(gòu)的決定，當(dāng)事方規(guī)定將在2019年3月中止地區(qū)法院的訴訟。在2019年12月和2020年2月，PTAB裁定588和303專利的全部權(quán)利要求以及922專利的部分權(quán)利要求是不可專利性的。

The PTAB found the challenged claims of the '014, '672 and '207 patents to be patentable. Intel moved for a continuation of the stay in March 2020 as it appealed certain rulings by the PTAB. In June 2020, the District Court issued an order continuing the stay through August 2021 and setting trial for December 2022.

PTAB裁定014、672和207專利被挑戰(zhàn)的權(quán)利要求具有專利性。英特爾針對PTAB的某些裁決提出上訴，要求在2020年3月繼續(xù)中止訴訟。2020年6月，地區(qū)法院下達(dá)了一項(xiàng)命令，將中止期限延長至2021年8月，并于2022年12月開始審判。

 
In June 2018, VLSI filed a second suit against Intel, in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement by various Intel processors of five additional patents acquired from NXP: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,212,663; 7,246,027; 7,247,552; 7,523,331; and 8,081,026. VLSI accused Intel of willful infringement and seeks an injunction or, in the alternative, ongoing royalties, enhanced damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and interest.

2018年6月，VLSI在特拉華州美國地區(qū)法院對英特爾提起第二次訴訟，指控英特爾各種處理器侵犯了從恩智浦獲得的五項(xiàng)其他專利：美國專利號6,212,663;7,246,027；7,247,552；7,523,331和8,081,026。VLSI指控Intel故意侵權(quán)，并尋求禁制令，或者尋求持續(xù)的特許權(quán)使用費(fèi)，增加損害賠償，律師的費(fèi)用和成本以及利息。

In March 2019, the District Court dismissed VLSI's claims for willful infringement as to all the patents-in-suit except the '027 patent, and also dismissed VLSI's allegations of indirect infringement as to the '633, '331, and '026 patents. In June 2019, Intel filed IPR petitions challenging the patentability of claims in all five patents-in-suit. In January 2020, the District Court vacated the November 2020 trial date based on agreement of the parties; no trial date is currently set.

2019年3月，地區(qū)法院駁回了VLSI關(guān)于除027專利之外的所有訴訟中專利的故意侵權(quán)的索賠，還駁回了VLSI關(guān)于633，331和026專利的間接侵權(quán)指控。在2019年6月，英特爾提交了多方復(fù)審（IPR）請?jiān)笗魬?zhàn)了所有五項(xiàng)訴訟專利權(quán)利要求的可專利性。2020年1月，地區(qū)法院根據(jù)雙方達(dá)成的協(xié)議撤消了2020年11月的審判日期，目前未設(shè)定審判日期。

In January and February 2020, the PTAB instituted review of the '552, '633, '331 and '026 patents and as a result, Intel moved for stay of the District Court proceedings. In May 2020, the District Court stayed the case as to the '026 and '552 patents but allowed the case to proceed on the '027 and '331 patents. For these two patents, VLSI is seeking damages of approximately $4.13 billion plus enhanced damages for the '027 patent. VLSI is no longer asserting claims from the '633 patent.

2020年1月和2月，PTAB對552，633，331和026專利進(jìn)行了復(fù)審，因此，英特爾尋求中止地區(qū)法院訴訟。2020年5月，地區(qū)法院對026和552專利案件進(jìn)行了中止，但允許對027和331專利進(jìn)行審理。對于這兩項(xiàng)專利，VLSI要求賠償大約41.3億美元，以及027專利的增加損害賠償。VLSI不再主張633專利的權(quán)利要求。

 
In March 2019, VLSI filed a third suit against Intel, also in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of six more patents acquired from NXP: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,366,522; 6,663,187; 7,292,485; 7,606,983; 7,725,759; and 7,793,025.

2019年3月，VLSI還在美國特拉華州地區(qū)法院對英特爾提起了第三次訴訟，指控其侵犯了從恩智浦獲得的另外六項(xiàng)專利：美國專利號6,366,522;6,663,187；7,292,485;7,606,983；7,725,759和7,793,025。在2019年4月，VLSI自愿撤回了這起特拉華州的案子，而沒有任何損害。

In April 2019, VLSI voluntarily dismissed this Delaware case without prejudice. In April 2019, VLSI filed three new infringement suits against Intel in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (WDTX) accusing various Intel processors of infringement. The three suits collectively assert the same six patents from the voluntarily dismissed Delaware case plus two additional patents acquired from NXP, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,523,373 and 8,156,357. VLSI accuses Intel of willful infringement and seeks an injunction or, in the alternative, ongoing royalties, enhanced damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and interest. Specifically, VLSI is seeking damages of approximately $11 billion collectively in the Texas cases, plus enhanced damages for alleged willful infringement.

在2019年4月，VLSI在美國德克薩斯州西區(qū)地區(qū)法院（WDTX）對英特爾提起三項(xiàng)新的侵權(quán)訴訟，指控英特爾各種處理器侵權(quán)。這三起訴訟共同主張?jiān)谧栽赋蜂N的特拉華州案件中擁有相同的六項(xiàng)專利，以及從恩智浦獲得的另外兩項(xiàng)專利，美國專利號為7,523,373和8,156,357。VLSI指控Intel故意侵權(quán)，并尋求禁制令，或者尋求持續(xù)的特許權(quán)使用費(fèi)，增加的賠償金，律師的費(fèi)用和成本以及利息。具體來說，VLSI要求在德克薩斯州的案件中合計(jì)賠償約110億美元，再加上據(jù)稱故意侵權(quán)的增加的賠償。

In the first Texas case, VLSI is asserting the '373 and '759 patents.(In December 2020, the court granted Intel summary judgment of non-infringement on the '357 patent.) VLSI seeks approximately $2.5 billion plus enhanced damages for alleged willful infringement in that case. That case was originally scheduled for trial in November 2020, but the court has now moved trial to February 2021.

在德克薩斯州的第一起案件中，VLSI主張373和759專利。（2020年12月，法院批準(zhǔn)了英特爾對不侵犯其'357專利的行為的簡易判決。）VLSI尋求約25億美元的賠償，以及針對涉嫌故意侵權(quán)的增加的損害賠償。該案原定于2020年11月開始審理，但法院現(xiàn)已將審判移至2021年2月。

第二部分

VLSI在中國兩地起訴Intel，尋求禁令為主，僅索賠130萬元

In October and November 2019 and in February 2020, Intel filed IPR petitions on certain asserted claims across six of the patents-in-suit in WDTX. Between May and October 2020, the PTAB denied all of these requests, and Intel has requested a rehearing, as well as a review from the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP), as to all petitions. All requests for POP review were denied in October and December 2020, and in December 2020 requests for rehearing were denied as to petitions filed on the 373 and 759 patents.

2019年10月、11月和2020年2月，英特爾針對在WDTX起訴的6項(xiàng)專利申請中的某些已主張權(quán)利提出了多方復(fù)審（IPR）請?jiān)笗Ｔ?020年5月至2020年10月之間，PTAB拒絕了所有這些請求，英特爾已要求對所有請?jiān)高M(jìn)行聽證，并要求判例意見小組（Precedential Opinion Panel（POP））進(jìn)行審查。所有關(guān)于POP審查的請求都在202

0年10月和2020年12月被拒絕，并且在2020年12月，關(guān)于373和759專利的申請被駁回。
 

In May 2019, VLSI filed a case in Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court against Intel, Intel (China) Co., Ltd., Intel Trading (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., and Intel Products (Chengdu) Co., Ltd. VLSI asserts Chinese Patent 201410094015.9 accusing certain Intel Core processors of infringement. VLSI requests an injunction as well as RMB 1.3 million in damages.

2019年5月，VLSI在深圳中級人民法院對英特爾，英特爾（中國）有限公司，英特爾貿(mào)易（上海）有限公司和英特爾產(chǎn)品（成都）有限公司提起訴訟。VLSI聲稱中國專利201410094015.9指控某些英特爾酷睿處理器侵權(quán)。VLSI要求法院發(fā)出禁制令，并要求賠償130萬元人民幣。

Defendants filed an invalidation petition in October 2019 with the PRB, but no hearing date has been set. In May 2020, defendants filed a motion to stay the trial court proceedings pending a determination on invalidity. The court has not yet ruled on the motion to stay. The court held the first evidentiary hearing in November 2020.

被告于2019年10月向PRB提交了無效宣告，但尚未確定聆訊日期。2020年5月，被告提出了一項(xiàng)動(dòng)議，要求中止審判法院的程序，以裁定無效。法院尚未就中止動(dòng)議作出裁決。法院于2020年11月舉行了第一次證據(jù)聽證會(huì)。

 
In May 2019, VLSI filed a second case in Shanghai Intellectual Property Court against Intel (China) Co., Ltd., Intel Trading (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., and Intel Products (Chengdu) Co., Ltd.

2019年5月，VLSI在上海知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法院對英特爾（中國）有限公司，英特爾貿(mào)易（上海）有限公司和英特爾產(chǎn)品（成都）有限公司提起第二起訴訟。

VLSI asserts Chinese Patent 201080024173.7. VLSI accuses certain Intel core processors and seeks an injunction. Defendants filed with the PRB an invalidation petition in October 2019. No hearing date has been set.

VLSI主張中國專利201080024173.7被使用于英特爾核心處理器并尋求禁令。被告于2019年10月向PRB提交了無效宣告，尚未確定聆訊日期。

In June 2020, defendants filed a motion to stay the trial court proceedings pending a determination on invalidity. The court has not yet ruled on the motion to stay. The court held its first evidentiary hearing in September 2020. The Court held a second evidentiary hearing and trial in December 2020 and has not yet issued a ruling.

2020年6月，被告提出了一項(xiàng)動(dòng)議，要求中止審理程序，以裁定無效。法院尚未就中止動(dòng)議作出裁決。法院于2020年9月舉行了第一次舉證聽證會(huì)。法院于2020年12月舉行了第二次舉證聽證和審判，但尚未發(fā)布裁決。
 

第三部分
Intel和蘋果發(fā)起對VLSI的反壟斷調(diào)查及主張已獲得專利許可

In November 2019, Intel, along with Apple Inc., filed a complaint against Fortress Investment Group LLC, Fortress Credit Co. LLC, Uniloc 2017 LLC, Uniloc USA, Inc., Uniloc Luxembourg S.A.R.L., VLSI, INVT SPE LLC, Inventergy Global, Inc., DSS Technology Management, Inc., IXI IP, LLC, and Seven Networks, LLC. Plaintiffs allege violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act by certain defendants, Section 7 of the Clayton Act by certain defendants, and California Business and Professions Code section 17200 by all defendants based on defendants' unlawful aggregation of patents.

2019年11月，英特爾與蘋果公司一起對Fortress Investment Group LLC，F(xiàn)ortress Credit Co. LLC，Uniloc 2017 LLC，Uniloc USA，Inc.，Uniloc Luxembourg SARL，VLSI，INVT SPE LLC，Inventergy Global，Inc.，DSS Technology Management Inc.，IXI IP，LLC和Seven Networks，LLC。原告指控某些被告違反了《謝爾曼法》第1條，某些被告違反了《克萊頓法》第7條，所有被告均基于被告非法聚集專利而違反了《加利福尼亞商業(yè)與職業(yè)守則》第17200條。

In February 2020, defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint. In July 2020, the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss with leave to amend. The court dismissed antitrust claims related to two DSS patents with prejudice. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in August 2020, and defendants moved to dismiss in September 2020. The court heard defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint in December 2020 and granted the motion in January 2021, with leave to further amend.

2020年2月，被告對原告的訴訟提起反對動(dòng)議。2020年7月，法院批準(zhǔn)了被告的動(dòng)議，以駁回其修改許可。法院在有偏見的情況下駁回了與兩項(xiàng)DSS專利有關(guān)的反托拉斯索賠。原告于2020年8月提出了修正案的訴狀，被告于2020年9月提出上訴。法院聽取了被告提出的在2020年12月解除修正案的訴狀的動(dòng)議，并于2021年1月批準(zhǔn)了動(dòng)議，并允許進(jìn)一步修正。

 
In June 2020, affiliates controlled by Fortress Investment Group, which also controls VLSI, acquired Finjan Holdings, Inc. Intel had signed a "Settlement, Release and Patent License Agreement" with Finjan in 2012, acquiring a license to the patents of Finjan and its affiliates, current or future, through a capture period of November 20, 2022. The agreement also contains covenants wherein Finjan agrees to cause its affiliates to comply with the agreement. As such, Intel maintains that it now has a license to the patents of VLSI, which has become a Finjan affiliate, and that Finjan must cause VLSI to dismiss its suits against Intel.

2020年6月，同時(shí)控制VLSI的Fortress Investment Group收購了Finjan Holdings，Inc。英特爾于2012年與Finjan簽署了“解決，發(fā)布和專利許可協(xié)議”，獲得了Finjan及其關(guān)聯(lián)公司的當(dāng)前或?qū)淼膶＠S可，直到2022年11月20日為止。該協(xié)議還包含F(xiàn)injan同意使其關(guān)聯(lián)企業(yè)遵守該協(xié)議的盟約。因此，英特爾堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為它已獲得VLSI的專利許可，VLSI公司已成為Finjan的關(guān)聯(lián)公司，并且Finjan必須促使VLSI撤銷對Intel的訴訟。

In August 2020, Intel started dispute resolution proceedings under the agreement. As a part of this dispute resolution process, Intel and Finjan held a mediation in December 2020, but failed to resolve their differences. Intel filed suit to enforce its rights under the License Agreement with Finjan in January 2021 in Delaware Chancery Court.

2020年8月，英特爾根據(jù)該協(xié)議啟動(dòng)了爭議解決程序。作為該爭端解決程序的一部分，英特爾和Finjan于2020年12月進(jìn)行了調(diào)解，但未能解決他們之間的分歧。英特爾于2021年1月在特拉華州法院起訴了與Finjan簽訂的《許可協(xié)議》，要求其行使其權(quán)利。

In September 2020, Intel filed motions to stay the Texas, Delaware, and Shanghai matters pending resolution of its dispute with Finjan. In November 2020, Intel filed a motion to stay the Shenzhen matter pending resolution of its dispute with Finjan. In November 2020, the Delaware Court denied Intel's motion to stay. The other stay motions remain pending. Finally, Intel filed a motion to amend its answer in the Texas matters to add a license defense in November 2020. The Court has yet to rule on the motion.

2020年9月，英特爾提出動(dòng)議，要求在與Finjan的糾紛解決之前，保留德克薩斯州，特拉華州和上海的事務(wù)。2020年11月，英特爾提出一項(xiàng)動(dòng)議，要求中方保留深圳案，以解決與Finjan的糾紛。2020年11月，特拉華州法院駁回了英特爾的中止動(dòng)議。其他中止動(dòng)議仍懸而未決。最后，英特爾于2020年11月提出一項(xiàng)動(dòng)議，以修正其在得克薩斯州問題上的答案，以增加許可辯護(hù)。法院尚未對該動(dòng)議作出裁定。

 
Given the procedural posture and the nature of these cases and that there are significant factual and legal issues to be resolved, we are unable to make a reasonable estimate of the potential loss or range of losses, if any, arising from these matters. We dispute VLSI's claims and intend to vigorously defend against them.

考慮到這些案件的程序性和性質(zhì)，以及要解決的重大事實(shí)和法律問題，我們無法合理估計(jì)這些事項(xiàng)可能造成的潛在損失或損失范圍（如有）。我們對VLSI的主張?zhí)岢霎愖h，并打算為之辯護(hù)。

來源：IPRdaily中文網(wǎng)（iprdaily.cn）

作者：肖振春  知識產(chǎn)權(quán)理想國

編輯：IPRdaily王穎          校對：IPRdaily縱橫君

注：原文鏈接：VLSI訴Intel系列案，在美國索賠超200億美元而在我國僅索賠130萬元（點(diǎn)擊標(biāo)題查看原文）

如有想看文章主題內(nèi)容，歡迎留言評論~

「關(guān)于IPRdaily」

IPRdaily是具有全球影響力的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)媒體，致力于連接全球知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與科技創(chuàng)新人才。匯聚了來自于中國、美國、歐洲、俄羅斯、以色列、澳大利亞、新加坡、日本、韓國等15個(gè)國家和地區(qū)的高科技公司及成長型科技企業(yè)的管理者及科技研發(fā)或知識產(chǎn)權(quán)負(fù)責(zé)人，還有來自政府、律師及代理事務(wù)所、研發(fā)或服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)的全球近100萬用戶（國內(nèi)70余萬+海外近30萬），2019年全年全網(wǎng)頁面瀏覽量已經(jīng)突破過億次傳播。

（英文官網(wǎng)：iprdaily.com  中文官網(wǎng)：iprdaily.cn） 

本文來自IPRdaily中文網(wǎng)（iprdaily.cn）并經(jīng)IPRdaily.cn中文網(wǎng)編輯。轉(zhuǎn)載此文章須經(jīng)權(quán)利人同意，并附上出處與作者信息。文章不代表IPRdaily.cn立場，如若轉(zhuǎn)載，請注明出處：“http://jupyterflow.com/