CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY v. MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LTD. et al
| CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY |
| MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LTD. and MARVELL SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. |
| 2:2009cv00290 |
| March 6, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Pittsburgh Office |
| Allegheny |
| Nora Barry Fischer |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
933
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that CMU's Motion for Prejudgment and Post-Judgment Interest, (Docket No. 788 ), Motion for a Permanent Injunction, Post-Judgment Royalties, and Supplemental Damages, (Docket No. 786 ), and Motion for a Finding of Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages, (Docket No. 790 ) are granted, in part and denied, in part; CMU's Motion for Prejudgment and Post-Judgment Interest 788 is granted to the extent that CMU seeks post-judgment interest under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 but denied to the extent that CMU seeks prejudgment interest under 35 U.S.C. § 284; CMU's Motion for a Permanent Injunction, Post-Judgment Royalties, and Supplemental Damages 786 is granted to the extent that CMU will be awar ded supplemental damages in the amount of $79,550,288.00; denied to the extent that a permanent injunction is sought; and granted, in part, as the Court will order an on-going royalty of $0.50 per sale of Accused Chips by Marvell; and, CMU& #039;s Motion for a Finding of Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages 790 is granted to the extent that the Court will award enhanced damages at a rate of 1.23 multiplied by the jury's award and supplemental damages, for a total enhancement of $287,198,828.60, but denied to the extent that CMU seeks enhanced damages at a higher rate (details more fully stated in said Memorandum Opinion). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/31/2014. (bdk)
|
|
Filing
920
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that Marvell's Motion for Judgment on Laches 802 is denied (details more fully stated in said Memorandum Opinion). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 1/14/14. (bdk)
|
|
Filing
901
OPINION indicating that, for reasons stated within, the Court denies Marvell's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, or in the Alternative, New Trial on Non-Damages Issues 805 , and Marvell's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, New Trial And/Or Remittitur With Respect To Damages 807 . The Court grants CMU's Motion for a Finding of Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages 790 , in part, on willfulness, and reserves its ruling on enhanced damages for a forthcoming opinio n. The Court also reserves its rulings on Marvell's Motion for Judgment on Laches 802 , CMU's Motion for Permanent Injunction, Post-Judgment Royalties, and Supplemental Damages 786 , and CMU's Motion for Prejudgment and Post-Judgment Interest 788 , for a memorandum opinion that will be filed in due course. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 9/23/13. (jg)
|
|
Filing
900
OPINION indicating that, for reasons more fully stated within, Defendants' Motion for "Judgment as a Matter of Law or, in the Alternative, New Trial on Non-Damages Issues" 805 is denied in part, to the extent predicated on CMU's alleged misconduct. A forthcoming opinion will address the remaining issues of this motion. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 8/23/13. (jg)
|
|
Filing
884
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that, for reasons stated more fully within, Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 285 791 is denied without prejudice to the right of Plaintiff to renew same after disposition of any appeal by the Federal Circuit and/or further proceeding at the trial level. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 6/26/13. (jg) Modified on 6/26/2013. (jg, )
|
|
Filing
864
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that, for reasons more fully stated within, Plaintiff's "Motion to Strike Certain Paragraphs of the Affidavits of Sehat Sutardja and Zining Wu" (Docket No. 830 ) is denied. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 4/24/13. (jg)
|
|
Filing
856
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that, for the reasons stated more fully within, Defendants MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LTD. and MARVELL SEMICONDUCTOR, INC.'s "Motion for Reconsideration and Stay of this Court's Order Denying Marvell's Motion to Seal" (Docket No. 846 ) is denied. Marvell shall file an un-redacted version of Dr. Sutardja's affidavit and all disputed slides by 4/24/13. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 4/17/13. (jg)
|
|
Filing
819
MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 800 Defendants' Motion to Compel or to Review in Camera Documents Withheld by CMU that are Relevant to Laches (details more fully stated in said Order). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 2/28/13. (jg)
|
|
Filing
720
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that jury selection and trial in this patent infringement action commenced on 11/26/12. Presently before the Court is Marvell's Oral Motion to Strike Slide 19 of Plaintiff's Demonstrative and Associate Testimony (Docket No. 674 ". (Docket No. 660 ). CMU opposes this motion and filed a Response in Opposition 675 . The Court heard argument during trial upon the oral motion on 11/30/12 674 . Consistent with the record, and for the following reasons, Marvell's motion is denied. (Docket No. 674 at 36-37). (Details more fully stated in said Order). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 12/17/12. (jg)
|
|
Filing
713
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that Marvell's Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Catharine M. Lawton is granted, in part and denied, in part (details more fully stated in said Memoradum Opinion). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 12/15/2012. (bdk)
|
|
Filing
672
ORDER indicating that for the reasons stated more fully within, Marvell's Emergency Motion to Strike CMU's Attempt to Include Noninfringing Sales of Chips that are Never Used in the U.S. in the Damages Case it Intends to Present to the Jury 656 is denied. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/29/12. (lks)
|
|
Filing
614
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that Plaintiff's Motion in Limine No. 2 to Preclude Irrelevant or Highly Prejudicial Evidence or Argument, 496 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/7/12. (lks)
|
|
Filing
608
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that Marvell's "Motion in Limine No. D12 To Preclude CMU From Introducing Evidence and Argument Regarding Any Compensatory Damages Beyond a Reasonably Royalty" 523 is granted, in part and denied, in part; Marvell's Motion is granted to the extent that CMU is precluded from introducing evidence or argument at trial of the prospective harms to CMU (as set forth in pages 377-79 of Ms. Lawtons expert report) as a result of the alleged failure of Marv ell to enter into a license for the patents-in-suit; and,Marvell's Motion is denied to the extent that it seeks a pretrial order precluding all evidence of the economic circumstances of CMU and the DSSC at the time of the hypothetical negotiation. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/6/2012. (bdk)
|
|
Filing
604
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that Defendant Marvell's Motion in Limine No. D9 to Exclude Reference to the Entire Price, Profit, and/or Margin Associated with Any One or More Accused Chips 514 is denied; counsel for the parties shall provide joint jury instructions in accord with this Courts opinions on or before November 9, 2012 at 5:00p.m. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/5/12.(lks)
|
|
Filing
601
MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 485 Defendant Marvell Technology Group's (Marvell) Motion in Limine No. D3 Re: Precluding CMU from Introducing Evidence of Willfulness; Marvell's motion (Docket No. 485) is DENIED without prejudice, with the Co urt to reserve its ruling on the issue of willfulness until the parties have had an opportunity to present their evidence at trial. Counsel for the parties are HEREBY ORDERED to provide joint interrogatories and jury instructions to this end on or before November 9, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/2/12. (lks)
|
|
Filing
451
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that, for reasons stated more fully within, Defendants' Motion to Exclude the Opinions of Catherine M. Lawton (Docket No. 367 ) is granted, in part, and denied, in part, in accord with the preceding discussion. Th e motion is granted to the extent that Ms. Lawton may not testify to total revenue, total profit, or total margin, except to start her analysis. The motion is denied in all other respects, such that Ms. Lawton may refer to the total number of sales, total apportioned revenue, average price per chip, operating profit per chip, and apportioned profit per chip in making her calculations. The parties shall meet and confer and submit a proper limiting instruction in accord with this Opinion and the following Order. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 8/24/12. (jg)
|
|
Filing
423
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that, for reasons more fully stated within, Defendants' "Pro Forma Motion for Reconsideration Re: Marvell's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Patent Invalidity" 339 is denied. An appropriate Order follows. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 6/12/12. (jg)
|
|
Filing
337
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that, for reasons stated more fully within and despite its initial concerns, the Court finds that the Group I claims of the 839 and 180 Patents are not invalid under § 112 of the Patent Act. Therefore, Marvell' ;s motion (Docket No. 318 ) is denied. The parties shall adhere to the schedule already in place for the remainder of expert discovery, the final round of summary judgment motions, and any Daubert motions. An appropriate order follows. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 4/10/12. (jg)
|
|
Filing
306
MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that, for reasons stated within, the Court finds that claims 1-5 of the 839 Patent and claims 1-2 of the 180 Patent are not anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e), Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,201,839 and 6,438,180 218 is therefore denied. An appropriate Order Follows. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 9/28/11. (jg)
|
|
Filing
259
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that, for reasons stated within, Defendants' Motion to Strike 252 is denied; that Defendants may, in accordance with Local Civil Rule 56(D), respond to the allegations of paragraphs 102-125 of Plaintiff's " ;Response to Marvell Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment," (Docket No. 233 ), by 3/24/11 at 5:00 p.m. As part of its calculation, the Court weighed Defendants' request that they be provided 10 days from today's Order to file their supplemental response. (Docket No. 252 at 4). However, in settling on the chosen date, the Court expresses a desire that this case continue on the existing briefing and argument schedule. (See Docket Nos. 225 , 235 ). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/18/11. (jg)
|
|
Filing
195
MEMORNANDUM ORDER indicating that Presently before the Court is a discovery dispute concerning Plaintiffs request that Defendants designate and prepare a witness capable of testifying to Defendants corporate structure and tax strategy. 158 . Defen dants have objected to this discovery on the basis of relevance. 161 . They further argue that the requested information is likely to be subject to the attorney-client privilege and is duplicative 174 ). The issue has been fully briefed and the Court heard argument on August 27, 2010. (Docket Nos. 158 ; 161 ; 169 ; 174 ). The Court understands that, despite further discussion, the parties have been unable to reach an agreement on this issue and desire a ruling from the Court. Therefo re, upon consideration of the parties arguments, and for the following reasons, the Court overrules Defendants objections and finds that Defendants shall make available a Rule 30(b)(6) witness for deposition in regard to Defendants corporate structur e and tax strategy (details more fully stated in said Order); Therefore, having found that Plaintiffs discovery request is appropriate, coupled with Defendants failure to produce a witness in accordance with the strictures of Rule 30(b)(6), it is her eby ordered that Defendants shall produce a witness to provide answers to Topic 1 of Plaintiffs Notice of Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Regarding Sales, Marketing, and Financial Matters within thirty (30) days of this Memorandum Opinion. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 11/29/10. (jg)
|
|
Filing
187
ORDER indicating that Defendants shall search the emails and related documents maintained by Defendants' CEO and CTO, respectively, and shall produce the responsive documents found by November 5, 2010 at 5:00 p.m. (details more fully stated in said Order). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 10/27/10. (tpk)
|
|
Filing
175
OPINION (regarding consturction for disputed claim terms); An appropriate Order will follow. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 10/1/10. (jg)
|
|
Filing
54
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 25 MOTION to Transfer Case To The Northern District of California filed by MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LTD., MARVELL SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. indicating that, for the reason stated within, Defendants' Motion to Transfer Venue to the Northern District of California is denied. An appropriate order to follow. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 9/21/09. (jg)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
