|12 Months Ended|
Dec. 31, 2022
|Loss Contingency [Abstract]|
Quarterhill Inc. Litigation
On July 2, 2018, three entities named Aquila Innovations, Inc. (Aquila), Collabo Innovations, Inc. (Collabo), and Polaris Innovations, Ltd. (Polaris), filed separate patent infringement complaints against the Company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Aquila alleges that the Company infringes two patents (6,239,614 and 6,895,519) relating to power management; Collabo alleges that the Company infringes one patent (7,930,575) related to power management; and Polaris alleges that the Company infringes two patents (6,728,144 and 8,117,526) relating to control or use of dynamic random-access memory, or DRAM. Each of the three complaints seeks unspecified monetary damages, interest, fees, expenses, and costs against the Company; Aquila and Collabo also seek enhanced damages. Aquila, Collabo, and Polaris each appear to be related to a patent assertion entity named Quarterhill Inc. (formerly WiLAN Inc.).
On May 14, 2020, at the request of Polaris, the Court dismissed all claims related to one of the two patents in suite in the Polaris case. On June 10, 2020, the Court granted AMD’s motions to stay the Polaris and Aquila cases pending the completion of inter partes review of each of the patents-in-suit in those cases by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. On February 22, 2021, February 26, 2021, and March 10, 2021, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued final written decisions in inter partes reviews invalidating all asserted claims of the remaining Polaris and Aquila patents.
On May 10, 2021, Aquila filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for the IPR decision regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,895,519. On April 30, 2021, Polaris filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for the IPR decision regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,117,526. On May 14, 2021, AMD filed a notice of cross-appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for the IPR decision regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,117,526. On July 18, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision.
On February 8, 2022, Polaris filed a lawsuit against Xilinx, Inc. alleging infringement of four patents related to memory chips and memory interfaces. On February 22, 2022, the Company was served with the complaint. On April 14, 2022, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On April 28, 2022, Polaris filed an amended complaint. On May 12, 2022, the Company filed an answer to the amended complaint.
On June 1, 2022, Polaris filed two lawsuits against the Company and Hewlett-Packard GmbH, HP Deutschland GmbH in the Hamburg and Munich Courts in Germany, alleging infringement of two patents related to memory chips and memory interfaces. On July 15, 2022, Polaris filed a lawsuit against the Company, ASUSTeK Computer Inc., and ASUS Computer GmbH, alleging infringement of a patent related to memory chips and memory interfaces.
Based upon information presently known to management, the Company believes that the potential liability of the above listed legal proceeding, if any, will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.
Monterey Research Litigation
On November 15, 2019, Monterey Research, LLC (Monterey) filed a patent infringement complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Monterey alleges that the Company infringes six U.S. patents: 6,534,805 (related to SRAM cell design); 6,629,226 (related to read interface protocols); 6,651,134 (related to memory devices); 6,765,407 (related to programmable digital circuits); 6,961,807 (related to integrated circuits and associated memory systems); and 8,373,455 (related to output buffer circuits). On August 12, 2021, Monterey filed two patent infringement complaints in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. In the first complaint, Monterey alleges that the Company infringes two patents (8,694,776 and 9,767,303) related to memory controllers, three patents (8,572,297, 7,609,799, and 7,899,145) related to circuit designs, and one patent (6,979,640) related to semiconductor processing. In the second complaint, Monterey alleges that the Company infringes one patent (6,680,516) related to semiconductor processing. On March 31, 2022, the Company entered into an agreement which will provide the Company a license to the Monterey Research patents. The agreement did not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, cash flows, or results of operation.
Analog Devices Litigation
On December 5, 2019, Analog Devices, Inc. (ADI) filed a lawsuit against Xilinx alleging infringement of eight patents related to switching circuits, comparators, analog to digital convertors, signal conditioners, and switched capacitors. On January 21, 2020, Xilinx filed its answer and counterclaims alleging infringement by ADI of eight patents related to digital to analog converters, serializing data paths, transceivers, networks on chip, termination circuits, and data transmitters. In November 2022, the Company and Analog Devices, Inc. resolved all ongoing patent litigations, based on mutually agreed upon terms. As part of this resolution, the two companies have committed to pursue technology collaborations to bring next generation solutions to their communications and data center customers. The agreement did not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, cash flows, or results of operations.
Future Link Systems Litigation
On December 21, 2020, Future Link Systems, LLC (Future Link) filed a patent infringement complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Future Link alleges that the Company infringes three U.S. patents: 7,983,888 (related to simulated PCI express circuitry); 6,363,466 (related to out of order data transactions); and 6,622,108 (related to interconnect testing). On December 21, 2021, Future Link filed a lawsuit alleging infringement of two U.S. patents (8,099,614 and 7,685,439) related to power management. On December 28, 2021, Future Link filed a complaint at the United States International Trade Commission alleging infringement of the same two power management patents. Several of the Company’s customers were also named as respondents. On March 31, 2022, the Company entered into an agreement which will provide the Company a license to the Future Link patents. The agreement did not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, cash flows, or results of operations.
The Company is named as a responsible party on Superfund clean-up orders for three sites in Sunnyvale, California that are on the National Priorities List. Since 1981, the Company has discovered hazardous material releases to the groundwater from former underground tanks and proceeded to investigate and conduct remediation at these three sites. The chemicals released into the groundwater were commonly used in the semiconductor industry in the United States in the wafer fabrication process prior to 1979.
In 1991, the Company received Final Site Clean-up Requirements Orders from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board relating to the three sites. The Company has entered into settlement agreements with other responsible parties on two of the orders. During the term of such agreements, other parties have agreed to assume most of the foreseeable costs as well as the primary role in conducting remediation activities under the orders. The Company remains responsible for additional costs beyond the scope of the agreements as well as all remaining costs in the event that the other parties do not fulfill their obligations under the settlement agreements.
To address anticipated future remediation costs under the orders, the Company has computed and recorded an estimated environmental liability of approximately $3.9 million and has not recorded any potential insurance recoveries in determining the estimated costs of the cleanup. The progress of future remediation efforts cannot be predicted with certainty and these costs may change. The Company believes that any amount in addition to what has already been accrued would not be material.
Other Legal MattersThe Company is a defendant or plaintiff in various actions that arose in the normal course of business. With respect to these matters, based on the management’s current knowledge, the Company believes that the amount or range of reasonably possible loss, if any, will not, either individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
No definition available.
The entire disclosure for loss and gain contingencies. Describes any existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as of the balance sheet date (or prior to issuance of the financial statements) as to a probable or reasonably possible loss incurred by an entity that will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, and typically discloses the amount of loss recorded or a range of possible loss, or an assertion that no reasonable estimate can be made.
Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef