Intel beats VLSI in $3.1bn Texas suit

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Intel beats VLSI in $3.1bn Texas suit

adobestock-288834591-editorial-use-only.jpeg

In the second trial of three, Intel punches back at VLSI after a $2.18 billion verdict from the same court in March

In a surprise turn of events at the District Court for the Western District of Texas yesterday, April 21, a jury ruled in favour of Intel in the tech company’s second patent trial against VLSI Technology, in which the latter was seeking $3.1 billion in damages.

The news comes less than two months after a jury in the same court ruled against Intel, delivering a record-breaking $2.18 billion damages award to VLSI, a unit of the hedge fund Fortress Investment Group.

Intel is seeking a new trial in that case, and has said it intends to appeal the $2.18 billion verdict.

Related stories

Yesterday’s ruling, made in Waco, was handed down in the fourth patent trial to take place in Alan Albright’s court since his appointment in 2018 and it was the third victory for a defendant. The first was in MV3 v Roku, which ended in December 2020.

VLSI sued Intel at the Western District of Texas in April 2019, alleging that the tech company had infringed its patent pertaining to speed shift technology.

A third trial in Albright’s court over similar patented technology is scheduled for June.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
The court ruled against the owner of the ‘Umbro’ mark, despite noting that post-sale confusion can be a legitimate ground for infringement
Shem Otanga discusses the importance of curiosity and passion, and why he would have loved to have been a professional recording artist
Practitioners say the Bombay High Court shouldn’t have refused well-known trademark recognition for TikTok simply because the app is banned in India
In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Attorneys at four firms explain the AI trends they expect in the future, including a potential shift in who plaintiffs sue for copyright infringement
The dispute at the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court pits Dryrobe against D-Robe and will include a ‘genericide’ element
Gift this article