Free Redacted Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 1 of 38

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff,
V.

C.A. No. 04-1371 JJF

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, and FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Defendants.

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER

POWER INTEGRATIONS' PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. William J. Marsden, Jr. (#2247) Kyle Wagner Compton (#4693) 919 N. Market Street, Suite 1100 P.O. Box 1114 Wilmington, DE 19899-1114 Telephone: (302) 652-5070 Email: marsden0),fr.com Email: kcompton e,fr.com Frank E. Scherkenbach 225 Franklin Street Boston, MA 02110-2804 Telephone: (617) 542-5070 Howard G. Pollack Michael Headley 500 Arguello Street, Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 839-5070 Attorneys for Plaintiff POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 2 of 38

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

FINDINGS OF FACT ............................................................................................1 A. Background ................................................................................................1 i. ii. iii. iv. B. C. The Parties .....................................................................................1 The Patents-in-suit .........................................................................1 Procedural History .........................................................................2 Fairchild's Contentions Regarding Inequitable Conduct ...............2

The '876 Patent ..........................................................................................3 The '851 Patent ..........................................................................................6 i. ii. Alleged Misstatement During Prosecution ....................................6 Allegation Regarding the SMP211 ..............................................13

D.

The '366 Patent ........................................................................................15 i. ii. Allegation regarding the SMP3 ...................................................15 Allegation regarding the SMP240/260 ........................................19

E. II.

The '075 Patent ........................................................................................22

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW .................................................................................24 A. B. '876 Patent ............................................................................................... 24 '851 Patent ...............................................................................................25

C.
D.

'366 Patent ............................................................................................... 29
'075 Patent ............................................................................................... 32

i

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 3 of 38

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES

PAGE

Akron Polymer Container Corp. v. Exxel Container, Inc., 148 F . 3d 1380 (Fed. Cir. 1998) ....................................................................................27, 30, 31 Allen Engineering Corp. v. Bartell Industrial, Inc., 299 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2002) ..........................................................................................26, 26,33 Dayco Products, Inc. v. Total Containment Inc., 329 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ..............................................................................27, 28, 31, 32 Ethicon, Inc. v. Quigg, 25,29 849 F.2d 1422 (Fed. Cir. 1988) ..........................................................................................25, Halliburton Co. v. Schlumberger Tech. Corp., 925 F.2d 1435 (Fed. Cir. 1991) ....................................................................................27, 31, 33 Hebert v. Lisle Corp., 99 F.3d 1109 (Fed. Cir. 1996) ..................................................................................................30 Honeywell Intern. Inc. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp., 488 F.3d 982 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ..................................................................................................26 Jazz Photo Corp. v. International Trade Commission, 264 F.3d 1094 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ................................................................................................27 Juicy Whip, Inc. v. Orange Bang, Inc., 292 F.3d 728 (Fed. Cir. 2002) ..................................................................................................26 Key Pharm., Inc. v. Hercon Laboratoriess Corp., 26,33 981 F. Supp. 299 (D. Del. 1997) ........................................................................................26, Lifescan, Inc. v. Home Diagnostics, Inc., 103 F. Supp. 2d 379 (D. Del. 2000) .........................................................................................27 Lummus Industries, Inc. v. D.M. & E Corp., 25,29 862 F.2d 267 (Fed. Cir. 1988 ) ............................................................................................25, Merck & Co. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 288 F. Supp. 2d 601 (D. Del. 2003) .............................................................................28, 31, 34 Mosaid Technologies Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., 362 F. Supp. 2d 526 (D.N.J. 2005) ..........................................................................................25 Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., 438 F.3d 1123 (Fed. Cir. 2006) ....................................................................................28, 31, 33 STATUTES 25,29 MPEP § 2242 (8th ed., rev. 5, Aug. 2006) ................................................................................25,

ii

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 4 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 5 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 6 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 7 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 8 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 9 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 10 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 11 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 12 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 13 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 14 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 15 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 16 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 17 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 18 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 19 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 20 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 21 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 22 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 23 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 24 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 25 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 26 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 27 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 28 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 29 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 30 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 31 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 32 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 33 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 34 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 35 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 36 of 38

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 37 of 38

29. The Court further finds that even if the alleged instances of inequitable conduct were combined, there is no evidence of any type of pattern from which to infer that Power Integrations acted with deceptive intent . Fairchild has not shown with clear and convincing evidence that Power Integrations was so culpable that the '075 patent must be held unenforceable . Merck & Co. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 288 F. Supp . 2d 601 , 631 (D. Del. 2003 ) ("[Claimants] must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that material information was intentionally withheld for the purpose of the misleading or deceiving the examiner."). 30. Therefore , Fairchild' s claim that the Power Integrations committed inequitable conduct in the prosecution of the '075 patent has not been established ; the '075 patent is enforceable. Dated : November 21, 2007 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: William J. arsden, Jr. (V247) Kyle Wagne ton (#1693) i e 1100 919 N. Market Street, P.O. Box 1114 Wilmington, DE 19899-1114 Telephone: (302) 652-5070 Email: [email protected] Frank E. Scherkenbach 225 Franklin Street Boston, MA 02110-2804 Telephone: (617) 542-5070 Howard G. Pollack Michael Headley 500 Arguello Street , Suite 500 Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 839-5070
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.

34

Case 1:04-cv-01371-JJF

Document 621

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 38 of 38