Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
In the ordinary course of conducting our business, we have in the past and may in the future become involved in various legal actions and other claims. We may also become involved in other judicial, regulatory and arbitration proceedings concerning matters arising in connection with the conduct of our businesses. Some of these matters may involve claims of substantial amounts. In addition, from time to time, third parties may assert intellectual property infringement claims against us in the form of letters and other forms of communication. These legal proceedings may be subject to many uncertainties and there can be no assurance of the outcome of any individual proceedings. An adverse outcome in certain of these proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, and could cause the market value of our common stock to decline.
Legal Actions
U.S. Patent Litigation
On January 26, 2024, Facet Technology Corp. (“Facet”) sued Mobileye in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas for patent infringement. The suit accuses Mobileye Global Inc., Mobileye Vision Technologies Ltd. and Mobileye Inc. of allegedly infringing two expired patents. Despite expiration of the patents, the suit seeks injunctive relief and a permanent injunction as well as unspecified damages, fees and costs. Mobileye Vision Technologies Ltd. and Mobileye Inc., sued Facet in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement of both patents. Before either action was answered, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the US Patent and Trademark Office instituted two Inter Parte Review (IPR) proceedings on both patents, and both district court actions were stayed. Final Determinations were reached by the PTAB in both IPRs. In one, the PTAB found invalid all claims that Facet asserted in the Texas suit. The PTAB upheld the patentability of other claims not asserted in the Texas suit. Facet’s request for Director review was denied, and the deadline to appeal has passed without Facet doing so. In the other IPR, the PTAB upheld the patentability of a single claim. Mobileye is pursuing an appeal of that decision. In May 2026, Facet moved to lift the stay in the Texas suit. Mobileye opposed, and the court has yet to rule. Therefore, the Texas and Minnesota district court actions both remain stayed. We intend to defend these matters vigorously. No provision was recorded in the condensed consolidated financial statements as of June 27, 2026.
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.