Fairchild Semiconductor Corp. v. Third Dimension (3d) Semiconductor, Inc.
District Court, D. Maine
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
D. BROCK HORNBY, District Judge.
The underlying dispute in this case is whether Fairchild owes patent license royalties to Third Dimension (3D) on Fair-child SuperFET™ products under a patent License Agreement between the parties. Fairchild says that its SuperFET™ products are not “covered by” (license terminology) 3D’s patents. 3D says that they are, and has attempted to terminate the License Agreement because Fairchild has not paid royalties. In this ruling, I Grant Fairchild’s motion for preliminary injunction…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Gonzales v. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União Do VegetalSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- amazon.com, Inc. v. barnesandnoble.com, Inc. And barnesandnoble.com, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- RANGE OF MOTION PRODUCTS LLC v. ARMAID COMPANY INCDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2021