M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Home
Verdicts
and
Decisions
Search Database
Recent Cases
Cases By Subject
Report A Case
Lawyers
Search Directory
By State & City
Add A
Lawyer Listing
Court
Reporters
Recent Listings
Search
By States & City
Add A Basic
Reporter Listing
Expert
Witnesses
Recent Listings
Search Directory
By State & Expertise
Add A Basic
Expert Witness
Listing
MoreLaw
Store
The Store
Recent Listings
(Search)
Add A Basic
Classified Ad
Links
County Seats
State Links
Information
About MoreLaw
Contact MoreLaw


Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Date: 10-11-2006

Case Style: Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.

Case Number: Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.

Judge: Unknown

Court: United States District Court for the District of Delaware, New Castle County

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Sean Paul Hayes and William J. Marsden, Jr. of Fish & Richardson, P.C., Wilmington, Delaware

Frank E. Scherkenback of Fish & Richardson, P.C., Boston, Massachusetts

Howaard G. Pollack, Michael R. Headley and David J. Miclean of Fish & Richardson, Redwood City, California

John M. Seaman of Bouchard, Margules & Friedlander, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware

Defendant's Attorney:

Steven Balick, Lauren E. Maguire, John Day and Tiffany Geyer Lydon of Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, Delaware

G. Hopkins Guy, III, Vickie L. Feeman, Bas de Black, and Brian H. VanderZanden of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, LLP, Menlo Park, California

Description:

Power Integrations (OTC: POWI), the leader in high-voltage analog integrated circuits for power conversion, today announced that it has won a verdict in its patent-infringement lawsuit against Fairchild Semiconductor. A jury found that Fairchild has willfully infringed all four Power Integrations patents asserted in the case, and has awarded Power Integrations damages of approximately $34 million.

A second trial, scheduled to begin on December 4, will address Fairchild's challenges to the validity of the infringed Power Integrations patents. The patents are presumed to be valid, and Fairchild cannot prevail unless it proves the patents are invalid by clear and convincing evidence. Should Fairchild be unable to prove the patents invalid, Power Integrations intends to seek an injunction against the continued manufacture, importation and sale of the infringing parts, as well as enhancement of the damages award based on the jury's finding of willful infringement.

All 33 Fairchild parts asserted to have infringed, as listed below, were found to infringe and may be subject to an injunction. These parts are currently found in such end products as cellphone chargers, DVD players, TV set-top boxes, LCD monitors and others.

"Power Integrations respects the intellectual property of others, and we expect our competitors to do the same," said Balu Balakrishnan, president and CEO of Power Integrations. "We are the leader in our market thanks in large part to the intellectual property that we have worked hard to develop over nearly two decades. This is our third successful effort to protect this intellectual property against unlawful infringement by our competitors, and we will continue making every effort to protect it going forward." List of infringing Fairchild parts: FSD200 FSDH321L FSDH0265RL FSD200B FSDL0165RN FSDL0365RL FSD210 FSDM0265RN FSDM0365RL FSD210B FSDM0265RNB FSDM311 FSD210H FSDH0265RN FSCM0565R FSD210HD FSDL0365RN FSCM0765R FSD211 FSDL0365RNB FSDM0565 FSD500 FSDM0365RN FSDM07652 FSDL321 FSDM0365RNB FSDH565 FSDL321L FSDL0165RL FSDH0165 FSDH321 FSDM0265RL FAN7601

Fairchild Semiconductor denied wrongdoing.

Outcome: Plaintiff's verdict for $34 million.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unavailable

Defendant's Experts: Unavailable

Comments: None



 
Home | Add Attorney | Add Expert | Add Court Reporter | Sign In
Find-A-Lawyer By City | Find-A-Lawyer By State and City | Articles | Recent Lawyer Listings
Verdict Corrections | Link Errors | Advertising | Editor | Privacy Statement
© 1996-2012 MoreLaw.com, Inc.