We’ll close our formal VLSI-Intel wall-to-wall coverage with what we hope is a comprehensive collection of stories about VLSI v. Intel from the past couple weeks (including repeating a few links we shared previously):
First, working backward in time, here’s coverage of the verdict and post-trial analysis:
- Joe spoke with Scott Graham of Law.com immediately following the verdict: Fortress, Irell Win $2.175B Patent Verdict Against Intel (subscription required)
- Scott Graham also broke down the future prospects for the jury’s verdict in post-trial proceedings: Skilled in the Art: Breaking Down the Patent Shot Heard Around the World (subscription required)
- Joe also spoke with Matt Bultman of Bloomberg Law, regarding the implications of a significant patentee-side verdict, as compared to last October’s defense-side verdict in the MV3 v. Roku trial: Intel’s $2 Billion Patent Loss Tests Waco Trial Jury Assumptions
- Susan Decker and Mr. Bultman also authored an earlier report on the verdict for Bloomberg: Intel Told to Pay $2.18 Billion After Losing Patent Trial
- Here’s coverage from Tommy Witherspoon of the Waco Tribune: Waco jury: Intel must pay $2 billion for patent infringement
- And from Paul J. Gately of local TV station KWTX: Local jury awards $2.175 billion in patent infringement suit
- Here’s Law360’s verdict alert by Britain Eakin: Intel Hit With $2.18B Jury Verdict In VLSI Patent Fight (subscription required)
- Cara Salvatore of Law360 analyzes whether the Intel Verdict Gives IP Attys 2 Billion Reasons To Sue In WDTX (subscription required)
- Winston & Strawn’s WacoWatch blog podcast series shares their own set of Trial Takeaways
- On IPWatchdog, Steve Brachmann opines that the Massive Jury Verdict for VLSI Sets Stage for ‘Efficient Infringement’ Debate
- From Matt Hamblen at Fierce Electronics: Intel to appeal jury verdict awarding $2.1B to VLSI in patent case
- From Timothy B. Lee at Ars Technica: Billion with a B—Intel hit with $2.2 billion patent judgment
- From Dennis Crouch at Patently-O: $2 billion verdict in Judge Albright’s Courtroom
A couple close looks at parties’ summations:
- From Scott Graham of Law.com: VLSI Closings: Will the Real Innovators Please Stand Up? (subscription required)
- From Britain Eakin of Law360: Intel Calls Damages Request ‘Outrageous’ at Patent Trial (subscription required)
Some other interesting mid-trial looks at the proceedings:
- From Scott Graham at Law.com (including commentary from Joe), a look at the parties’ on-the-fly examination tactics: Irell and Wilmer Go Door to Door in Waco Patent Trial (subscription required)
- From Matt Bultman of Bloomberg, a look at the parties’ dueling football analogies: Tom Brady NFL Career Analogies Swapped in Intel Patent Trial
- On Law.com, Scott Graham chatted with Michael Tomasulo and Dawanna McCray of Winston & Strawn for the LegalSpeak podcast: ‘A Billion Dollars at Stake’: Breaking Down the Trial That Has Patent Litigators Captivated
- And Winston & Strawn’s WacoWatch blog posted a couple podcast episodes of their own
And here’s our previously-shared coverage of Day 1:
- From Tommy Witherspoon of the Waco Tribune: Waco court hosts billion-dollar patent case against Intel
- From Matthew Bultman of Bloomberg Law: Intel, VLSI Patent Jury Trial Kicks Off in Waco After Delay Bid
- From Scott Graham of Law.com: How Morgan Chu Is ‘Spoon-Feeding’ a Billion-Dollar Damages Case to Jurors (subscription required)
- From Katie Buehler of Law360: VLSI, Intel Face Off In 1st In-Person Patent Jury Trial Of 2021 (no subscription required, given COVID-related content)
Given the size of the jury’s verdict, we’re sure this isn’t the end of the story, and we’ll continue to bring you important post-trial developments on a go-forward basis.
* * *