- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Panasonic files lawsuit contrary to Broadcom Corp
Panasonic, an Osaka-based multinational corporation, submitted two litigation on Thursday against Broadcom Corp that manufactures chips in the United States of America. The lawsuits were filed in the Western District of Texas of the United States District Court.
Allegations in contradiction of Broadcom Corp
Panasonic Corporation claims that Broadcom Corporation infringes on its patent rights in ten different products, including microprocessors, integrated circuits and numerous wireless networking components.
The lawsuit asked the judge for an unspecified amount of money as losses from the tech company. The company also requests a court order prohibiting Broadcom Corp from acting in any way that would jeopardize Panasonic's patent rights in the future.
The lawsuits also claim that Broadcom Corporation and its officers deliberately disrupted Panasonic's patent terms and rights in the design and manufacturing of various items used in the semiconductor industry. Panasonic does use patent applications filed by Broadcom Corporation to support their claims that the contrasting firm was intentionally infringing on petitioner's patent rights.
In addition, the complaints claimed that Broadcom intentionally violated the patents, despite the fact that Broadcom had acknowledged a few of those in its own patent filings.
John Guaragna, Matthew Satchwell, Brian Erickson, and Jake Zolotorev of DLA Piper are Panasonic Corporation's legal representatives. Presently, it is unknown who will represent Broadcom Corporation in the complaint.
Both Panasonic and Broadcom Corp. have not yet made any statements or comments regarding the complaint.
Prior actions concerning Broadcom and Panasonic Corp
The Broadcom Corporation has participated in court battles to defend patent rights before.
A few years back, Broadcom Corp. sued renowned automaker Toyota Motor Corporation in a Marshall City, Texas, US district court. According to a lawsuit, Toyota and four other Japanese technology companies, including Panasonic Corporation, violated Broadcom Corp.'s intellectual rights on at least six patents that were issued between 2005 and 2014.
Pioneer Corp., Denso Corp., and Renesas were the other defendants in the complaint (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 21-1260, No.21-1362 and No. 21-1511).
Broadcom Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against these identical companies before the International Trade Commission almost simultaneously.
The ITC denied Broadcom Corp.'s petition, which prompted the company to file a court appeal.
Broadcom Corp.'s appeals of the ITC's judgement to deny their patent claim were denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in March 2022.
Both the parties withdrew their separate lawsuits, which put an end to the lawsuits that were filed with the ITC claim.