Broadcom Corporation and Atheros Communications, Inc. v. Wi-LAN, Inc.
On December 10, 2008, the Company and Broadcom filed a complaint for declaratory judgment against Wi-LAN, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for Northern District of California, requesting the court to declare, among other things, that U.S. patent number6,549,759, (“‘759 Patent”), assigned to Wi-LAN is invalid, unenforceable and that the Company does not infringe any valid claims of the ‘759 Patent. This declaratory judgment action stemmed from Wi-LAN’s threat to add this patent into the complaints filed by Wi-LAN against the Company and others, now pending in the Eastern District of Texas. Similar declaratory judgment actions were filed by a number of other companies against Wi-LAN. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in seeking declaratory relief from Wi-LAN’s threat.
Atheros Communications, Inc. v. Lehman Brothers, Inc.
On January 30, 2009, the Company filed a Proof of Claim in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York against Lehman Brothers, Inc. seeking compensatory damages incurred in connection with Lehman Brothers’ investment of the Company’s cash in auction-rate securities and resulting losses of income and liquidity, as well as punitive damages. On the same day and for related reasons, the Company filed a Customer Claim against Lehman Brothers with the federal Securities Investor Protection Corporation. There can be no assurance that the Company will obtain compensation for the Company’s claims.
PACid Group, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al.
On March 30, 2009, PACid Group, LLC (“PACid”) filed a complaint against the Company and 18 other defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. In the complaint, PACid alleges that certain of the Company’s products infringe U.S. Patent Numbers 5,963,646 and 6,049,612 which relate to generation of encryption keys and methods of protecting information files using such keys. PACid seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company has answered the complaints, denying all allegations and asserting affirmative defenses. The Company also asserted counterclaims requesting declaratory judgment for non-infringement and invalidity. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in such defense.
Specht et al. v. Google Inc. et al.
On April 28, 2009, Erich Specht and The Android’s Dungeon Incorporated filed a complaint against Google Inc., the Open Handset Alliance and its numerous members, including the Company, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Chicago Division. In the complaint, Specht alleges infringing use of the ANDROID DATA mark, U.S. Trademark Registration Number 2,639,556. Specht seeks unspecified damages and other relief. The Company has not yet answered the complaint.