The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →TriQuint Semiconductor sued Avago Technologies in federal court in Arizona on July 23, 2009, over patents and products related to bulk acoustic-wave (BAW) filters. The dispute grew to include competing patent claims, trade-secret and copyright allegations, and antitrust claims. The companies settled all claims on May 15, 2012, exchanged patent cross-licenses, and agreed to dismiss related litigation. The settlement terms were confidential, so the public record does not establish a winner or a payout.
Why did TriQuint sue Avago?
The lawsuit concerned intellectual property used in BAW filtering for radio-frequency semiconductor applications. TriQuint’s complaint asked the court to rule that four Avago U.S. patents were invalid and that TriQuint products did not infringe them. TriQuint also alleged that three Avago products infringed TriQuint patents. Those were allegations and requests for court rulings, not findings that either side had infringed.
The companies had signed a standstill and tolling agreement on April 24, 2009, covering specified intellectual-property claims and selecting the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona as the forum. After settlement efforts failed, TriQuint filed its complaint there on July 23, 2009. Court filings
What claims did each side bring?
| Side | Claims and position |
|---|---|
| TriQuint | Sought declarations that four Avago patents were invalid and its products did not infringe those patents; also alleged that three Avago products infringed TriQuint patents. |
| Avago | Its September 2009 counterclaims alleged that TriQuint infringed ten Avago patents. Later amendments added trade-secret and copyright claims. |
Avago’s trade-secret allegations concerned information associated with Infineon’s BAW business and the hiring by TriQuint of two former Infineon employees. TriQuint also pursued antitrust theories related to Avago’s acquisition and patent activities. The existence of these claims does not establish that the alleged conduct occurred.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors#1 Best Overall
How did the case develop?
- September 17, 2009: Avago answered and asserted patent-infringement counterclaims.
- March 5, 2010: Avago amended its counterclaims to add California trade-secret claims tied to Infineon’s BAW business and former employees hired by TriQuint.
- August 2010: TriQuint amended its complaint, and Avago expanded its counterclaims to include copyright infringement.
- December 14, 2010, and January 12, 2011: The court heard claim-construction argument and issued its claim-construction ruling.
What had the court decided before settlement?
After fact and expert discovery, the court issued a summary-judgment order on February 24, 2012. It denied Avago’s motion in full. On TriQuint’s motion, it dismissed four Avago patent claims, Avago’s copyright, tort, and unfair-competition claims, and certain trade-secret claims. Other TriQuint patent and antitrust claims and some Avago claims remained for trial, which was scheduled for the third quarter of 2012. The order resolved some claims, but not the entire dispute.
How did the lawsuit end, and who won?
On May 15, 2012, the companies announced that they had agreed to settle all claims between them, entered into patent cross-licenses, and agreed to dismiss related litigation. The settlement and license terms were confidential. Public information therefore does not establish a damages award, settlement payment, royalty rate, detailed patent-by-patent license scope, or an overall winner. The accurate outcome is a negotiated settlement and cross-license after partial summary-judgment rulings, not a public trial verdict.
Rank #2
Were TriQuint’s reported litigation expenses a settlement payment?
No. Semiconductor Today reported that TriQuint recorded $19.2 million in litigation expenses for 2011 and $3.9 million for the first quarter of 2012, mainly attributable to the Avago dispute. These are reported expenses, not damages awarded or settlement payments. Semiconductor Today
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Rank #3
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
