LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
−Removed: CrestaTech Litigation
−Removed: We were a defendant in patent litigation originally filed by CrestaTech Technology Corporation, or CrestaTech.
−Removed: On January 21, 2014, CrestaTech filed a complaint for patent infringement against us in the United States District Court of Delaware, or District Court Litigation, alleging that we infringed U.S.
−Removed: 7,075,585, or the ‘585 Patent and 7,265,792, or the ‘792 Patent.
−Removed: In addition to asking for compensatory damages, CrestaTech alleged willful infringement and sought a permanent injunction.
−Removed: CrestaTech also named Sharp Corporation, Sharp Electronics Corp.
−Removed: and VIZIO, Inc.
−Removed: as defendants based upon their alleged use of our television tuners.
−Removed: Following the litigation history described in our prior filings on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q, the District Court dismissed the District Court Litigation in April 2018.
−Removed: While the successor plaintiff following a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding of CrestaTech below had suggested that the dismissal may have been in error, it took no action to re-instate the case.
−Removed: In the related bankruptcy proceeding, the plaintiff stated that it “no longer has any valid patent claims that it is asserting in any of the proceedings purchased under the Sale Agreement,” which includes the District Court
−Removed: Litigation against us in re Cresta Technology Corporation, Case No.
−Removed: 16-50808 (N.D.
−Removed: 2016) at Dkt.
−Removed: In November 2019, we entered into a settlement agreement with CF Crespe resolving all outstanding matters with CF Crespe and CrestaTech (its predecessor-in-interest).
−Removed: On December 5, 2019, the Federal Circuit dismissed our appeal from the inter partes review of CF Crespe’s patent number 7,075,585 -- the only remaining active matter as of the parties’ settlement.
−Removed: The terms of the settlement are confidential, and the settlement did not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
−Removed: Trango Systems, Inc.
−Removed: On or about August 2, 2016, Trango Systems, Inc., or Trango, filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, Central Division, against defendants Broadcom Corporation, Inc., or Broadcom, and us, collectively, Defendants.
−Removed: Trango is a purchaser that alleges various fraud, breach of contract, and interference with economic relations claims in connection with the discontinuance of a chip line we acquired from Broadcom in 2016.
−Removed: Trango seeks unspecified general and special damages, pre-judgment interest, expenses and costs, attorneys’ fees, punitive damages, and unspecified injunctive and equitable relief.
−Removed: On June 23, 2017, the Court sustained our demurrer to each cause of action in the second amended complaint, filed on or about December 6, 2016.
−Removed: Trango filed its third amended complaint on or about July 13, 2017.
−Removed: On February 23, 2018, the Court sustained, in part, our demurrer, dismissing with prejudice the cause of action for breach of a written contract, and Trango voluntarily dismissed its cause of action for breach of an implied-in-fact contract.
−Removed: The remaining causes of action have been permitted to proceed.
−Removed: On March 15, 2018, Trango filed its fourth amended complaint.
−Removed: We filed our answer on April 17, 2018.
−Removed: Also, on April 17, Broadcom filed a cross-complaint against us, alleging causes of action for indemnity, contribution and apportionment, and declaratory relief.
−Removed: Broadcom voluntarily dismissed the cross-complaint on June 8, 2018.
−Removed: On December 10, 2018, MaxLinear filed a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative summary adjudication concerning all of Trango’s causes of action asserted against MaxLinear.
−Removed: The parties entered into a settlement agreement and on June 6, 2019 the case was dismissed with prejudice.
−Removed: The terms of the settlement are confidential, and the settlement did not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
−Removed: Other Matters
−Removed: In addition, from time to time, we are subject to threats of litigation or actual litigation in the ordinary course of business, some of which may be material.
+Added: From time to time, we are subject to threats of litigation or actual litigation in the ordinary course of business, some of which may be material.
We believe that there are no currently pending litigation matters that, if determined adversely by us, would have a material effect on our business or that would not be covered by our existing liability insurance.
3 unchanged sentences
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.