Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Voss v. Sutardja et al
Case Number:
5:14-cv-01581
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action, Derivative Litigation
Judge:
Firms
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
January 26, 2015
Marvell Escapes Investor Suit Over $1.5B Patent Suit Loss
A group of shareholders lost their bid Monday to take on the founders of Marvell Technology Group Ltd. for their role in the company's $1.5 billion loss in a lawsuit for infringing Carnegie Mellon University's patents, when a California federal judge ruled Bermuda law should govern the dispute.
-
September 05, 2014
Marvell Seeks Tossing Of Suit Over $1.5B Patent Loss
Marvell Technology Group Ltd., a semiconductor company that recently lost a $1.5 billion lawsuit for infringing Carnegie Mellon University-owned patents, told a California federal judge on Thursday to toss a consolidated investor class action alleging company executives failed to prevent either the infringing activity or the litigation loss.
-
April 07, 2014
Marvell Faces Shareholder Suit Over $1.5B Patent Loss
A putative class of shareholders on Monday sued Marvell Technology Group Ltd., a semiconductor company that recently lost a $1.5 billion lawsuit alleging it infringed a patent owned by Carnegie Mellon University, claiming the company's officers willfully harmed Marvell by refusing to license the patent.