TriQuint Semiconductor sued Avago Technologies in federal court in Arizona on July 23, 2009, over patents and other intellectual property tied to bulk acoustic-wave (BAW) filters. The dispute grew into reciprocal 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 financial and licensing terms were confidential.
Why did TriQuint sue Avago?
The case grew out of a dispute over intellectual property used in BAW filtering for radio-frequency semiconductor applications. Under a standstill and tolling agreement signed on April 24, 2009, the companies selected the District of Arizona as the forum for specified intellectual-property claims. After settlement efforts failed, TriQuint filed its complaint there on July 23, 2009.
TriQuint asked the court to declare four Avago U.S. patents invalid and to find that TriQuint products did not infringe those patents. It also alleged that three Avago products infringed TriQuint patents. These were opposing legal positions, not findings that any patent was invalid or any product infringed.
What claims did Avago bring?
Avago answered on September 17, 2009, and asserted that TriQuint infringed ten Avago patents. Its later pleadings widened the dispute beyond patents.
#1 Best Overall
- Trade secrets: Avago alleged that TriQuint misappropriated information associated with Infineon’s BAW business, which Avago had acquired, and tied its claims to TriQuint’s hiring of two former Infineon employees.
- Copyright: Avago added copyright-infringement claims in an amended pleading in 2010.
- Antitrust: TriQuint pursued antitrust theories concerning Avago’s acquisition and patent activities.
The parties disputed these allegations. The existence of a claim does not establish that the alleged conduct occurred.
How did the court rule before the settlement?
After claim-construction proceedings in December 2010 and January 2011, the parties completed fact and expert discovery. On February 24, 2012, the court denied Avago’s summary-judgment 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.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
Not every claim was resolved by that order. TriQuint’s remaining patent and antitrust claims and some Avago claims were set for trial in the third quarter of 2012. The settlement made a trial unnecessary. The ruling was a significant partial result for TriQuint, but it was not a final judgment resolving every claim on the merits.
Who won, and was there a payout?
Public information does not establish a winner or disclose a damages award, settlement payment, royalty rate or the patent-by-patent scope of the licenses. The May 15, 2012 announcement said the companies settled all claims, entered patent cross-licenses and agreed to dismiss related litigation. It described an agreed resolution, not a public finding that one side prevailed overall.
Recommended Free Tools
TriQuint reported litigation expenses of $19.2 million for 2011 and $3.9 million for the first quarter of 2012, figures reported as mainly attributable to the Avago dispute. Those amounts were expenses incurred by TriQuint, not damages or settlement payments.
How the case unfolded
| Date | Development |
|---|---|
| April 24, 2009 | TriQuint and Avago signed a standstill and tolling agreement covering specified intellectual-property claims and selecting Arizona as the forum. |
| July 23, 2009 | TriQuint filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. |
| September 17, 2009 | Avago answered and asserted patent-infringement counterclaims. |
| March 5, 2010 | Avago amended its counterclaims to add California trade-secret claims concerning Infineon’s BAW business and former employees hired by TriQuint. |
| August 2010 | TriQuint amended its complaint; Avago expanded its counterclaims to include copyright infringement. |
| December 14, 2010 / January 12, 2011 | The court heard claim-construction argument and issued its claim-construction ruling. |
| February 24, 2012 | The court issued its summary-judgment order, disposing of several Avago claims while leaving other claims for trial. |
| May 15, 2012 | The companies announced settlement, patent cross-licenses and dismissal of related litigation. |
What the settlement leaves unknown
The settlement resolved the litigation, but the public announcement did not state what either company paid, whether money changed hands, or the detailed scope and duration of the cross-licenses. As a result, the public record summarized here cannot support claims about a payout, a royalty or which company obtained the more valuable license.
Rank #4
Avago president and CEO Hock Tan called the outcome “an amicable resolution with TriQuint.” TriQuint CEO Ralph Quinsey said, “We are happy to have successfully put this litigation behind us.” The statements accompanied the settlement announcement; neither supplies the confidential terms.
Quick Recap
Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
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.
