Legal Opinion
Silicon Graphics, Inc. v. ATI Technologies, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
Decided August 1, 2008No. 06-cv-611-bbcPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
BARBARA B. CRABB, District Judge.
The inevitable post trial motions are before the court after the jury found that defendants ATI Technologies, Inc., ATI Technologies ULC and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. had failed to prove the inval idity of claims 17, 18, 22 and 23 of plaintiff Silicon Graphics, Inc.’s U.S. Patent No. 6,650,327 patent. Defendants have moved for judgment as a matter of law in their favor or for a new trial on their unsuccessful invalidity claims, for a court trial on their claim of inequitable conduct, for attorney fees incurred in defending against…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Teleflex, Inc. v. Ficosa North America Corp., Fico Cables, S.A., and Ficosa North America S.A. De C.V.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Ntp, Inc. v. Research in Motion, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Moleculon Research Corporation v. Cbs, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Baldwin Graphic Systems, Inc. v. Siebert, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Silicon Graphics, Inc. v. ATI Technologies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Toshiba Corp. v. Imation Corp.District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2013
- Automatic Equipment Manufacturing Company v. Danko Manufacturing, LLCDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 2022