MOSAID Technologies vs. Intel: Semiconductor Patent Case Transferred to Oregon
Was möchten Sie als Nächstes tun?
Wählen Sie Ihren Weg entsprechend Ihren aktuellen Bedürfnissen:
Lernen Sie aus diesem Fall
Verstehen Sie die rechtliche Analyse, den Zeitplan und die wichtigsten Erkenntnisse.
EmpfohlenÜberprüfen Sie das Risiko meines Produkts
Führen Sie eine FTO-Analyse für Ihre eigene Technologie oder Ihr eigenes Produkt durch.
Patentlandschaft erkunden
Ähnliche Patente und Wettbewerbsinformationen anzeigen
📋 Fallzusammenfassung
| Fallbezeichnung | MOSAID Technologies, Inc. v. Intel Corp. |
| Fallnummer | 1:25-cv-00677 (WDTX), 3:26-cv-246 (D. Oregon) |
| Gericht | Western District of Texas (transferred from) to District of Oregon |
| Dauer | May 6, 2025 – Feb 3, 2026 273 days |
| Ergebnis | Transferred — Litigation Ongoing |
| Streitige Patente | |
| Beschuldigte Produkte | Intel’s 10nm, Intel 4, Intel 7, Intel 3, FinFET Low Power (22FFL), and Intel 16 process nodes |
Fallübersicht
Die Parteien
⚖️ Kläger
MOSAID Technologies, Inc. is a well-established patent licensing and assertion entity with a substantial portfolio concentrated in semiconductor memory and logic technologies.
🛡️ Beklagter
Intel Corporation is one of the world’s largest semiconductor manufacturers. Its advanced process nodes represent billions of dollars in R&D investment.
Die streitigen Patente
MOSAID asserted 11 U.S. patents spanning semiconductor device architecture and fabrication. These patents generally cover transistor structures, semiconductor device configurations, and fabrication processes directly implicated by Intel’s FinFET-based manufacturing.
- • US8809940B2
- • US7476957B2
- • US9379215B2
- • US8440517B2
- • US7514757B2
- • US9349655B2
- • US8338909B2
- • US9716091B2
- • US9564433B2
- • US7842577B2
- • US9209300B2
Working on advanced semiconductor nodes?
Check if your manufacturing process might infringe these or related patents before launch.
Zeitplan des Rechtsstreits und rechtliche Analyse
Zeitplan des Rechtsstreits und Verfahrensgeschichte
MOSAID filed suit on May 6, 2025, in the Western District of Texas — a calculated choice. The WDTX, under Chief Judge Alan D. Albright, has been among the nation’s most active venues for patent litigation.
However, after 273 days — on February 3, 2026 — the case was formally transferred, with the docket officially received by the District of Oregon on February 5, 2026, as Case No. 3:26-cv-246. Judge Alan D. Albright, who presided during the WDTX phase, is one of the most prominent patent judges in the country — his docket management practices and claim construction approaches are closely followed by the patent bar. The case’s transfer out of his court is itself a strategically significant event worth monitoring.
Ergebnis
The Western District of Texas closed the case on February 3, 2026, with the formal basis of termination being the transfer to the District of Oregon (Case No. 3:26-cv-246). No final judgment on the merits, damages award, or injunctive relief was issued at this stage. The substantive infringement claims — covering 11 patents and six Intel process node families — remain actively pending before the Oregon court.
Veranstaltungsort-Transfer-Analyse
The transfer from WDTX to Oregon is the defining legal event of this case’s first phase. Intel’s primary operations and relevant R&D activities are headquartered in Santa Clara, California, with significant engineering presence in Oregon (notably, Intel’s Hillsboro campus is one of its largest fabrication and engineering sites). Under In re Apple and subsequent Federal Circuit venue jurisprudence, defendants have increasingly succeeded in transferring cases away from WDTX when key witnesses and evidence are located elsewhere.
For MOSAID, the WDTX filing was a deliberate venue strategy — one that has become more difficult to sustain post-In re Volkswagen and related transfer decisions that strengthened defendants’ ability to invoke § 1404(a). The transfer to Oregon places the case in a venue where Intel has substantial local presence, potentially shifting procedural dynamics in Intel’s favor.
Rechtliche Bedeutung
This case exemplifies the ongoing tension between patent assertion entities and venue selection strategy following the Federal Circuit’s tightening of WDTX transfer standards. The 273-day WDTX tenure — encompassing likely early motions, scheduling orders, and transfer briefing — consumed significant litigation resources without reaching merits adjudication.
With 11 patents at issue, claim construction proceedings in Oregon will be pivotal. The patents cover semiconductor structural and process technologies, meaning construction of terms like “transistor channel region,” “gate dielectric,” or “fin structure” could determine infringement across Intel’s entire advanced node lineup simultaneously.
Strategische Erkenntnisse
For Patent Holders: MOSAID’s multi-patent, multi-product assertion strategy is high-leverage but venue-vulnerable. Patent holders targeting large semiconductor defendants should conduct rigorous § 1404(a) analysis before filing in WDTX, particularly when defendants have established engineering operations in other districts.
For Accused Infringers: Intel’s successful transfer (if transfer was defendant-initiated) demonstrates the ongoing value of venue challenges as a defensive tool. Early investment in transfer motions can reset the litigation dynamic and move cases to more favorable judicial environments.
Auswirkungen auf die Branche und den Wettbewerb
The MOSAID v. Intel dispute reflects a broader pattern of **semiconductor process node patent enforcement** that R&D and legal teams across the chip industry must monitor.
📋 MOSAID’s Portfolio Approach
MOSAID’s assertion of patents spanning multiple node generations (22FFL through Intel 3) suggests a portfolio theory of infringement: that core structural innovations persist across generational process improvements.
- View all 11 asserted patents in detail
- Analyze claim construction strategies
- Understand portfolio assertion patterns
🛡️ Intel’s Defense Strategy
Defendants must address such potent licensing arguments through both technical design-around strategies and robust IPR petition programs at the USPTO.
- Explore Intel’s IPR challenges
- Analyze prior art for asserted patents
- Identify potential design-around options
Gebiete mit hohem Risiko
FinFET structures, Gate-All-Around (GAA) transistors, interconnect architectures
11 Patents at Issue
Covering multiple Intel process node generations
Herausforderungen hinsichtlich der Veranstaltungsorte
Crucial defensive tool for large defendants
✅ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse
Venue selection in WDTX remains viable but requires rigorous § 1404(a) risk analysis when defendants have multi-state engineering operations.
Verwandte Rechtsprechung suchen →Multi-patent assertions against manufacturing processes require coordinated claim construction strategies.
Entdecken Sie die Analyse von Anspruchsauslegungen →Transfer to defendant-friendly venues can reset case dynamics significantly.
Analyze venue transfer trends →MOSAID’s portfolio approach — 11 patents across six product lines — reflects modern PAE assertion strategy targeting process-level technology.
PAE-Aktivität überwachen →Monitor Case No. 3:26-cv-246 (D. Oregon) for claim construction orders with industry-wide implications.
Aktuelles zu Rechtsstreitigkeiten verfolgen →Advanced node FTO analysis must extend beyond product patents to fabrication process and transistor structure IP.
FTO-Analyse für mein Produkt starten →Enterprise-level patent risk management should include PAE portfolio monitoring in semiconductor domains.
Build IP risk dashboards →Häufig gestellte Fragen
The case involves 11 U.S. patents, including US8809940B2, US7476957B2, US9379215B2, US8440517B2, US7514757B2, US9349655B2, US8338909B2, US9716091B2, US9564433B2, US7842577B2, and US9209300B2, covering semiconductor device and fabrication technologies.
The case was transferred from the Western District of Texas to the District of Oregon (Case No. 3:26-cv-246) on February 3–5, 2026. The specific basis was not publicly detailed in available records, but Intel’s significant engineering operations in Hillsboro, Oregon align with venue transfer standards under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
This case reinforces that advanced process node technologies face substantial patent assertion risk from licensing entities, and that venue strategy remains a critical — and increasingly contested — element of semiconductor patent litigation.
Sind Sie bereit, Ihre Patentstrategie zu stärken?
Schließen Sie sich den über 18.000 Fachleuten aus dem Bereich des geistigen Eigentums an, die PatSnap Eureka nutzen, um mit KI-gestützter Präzision Recherchen zum Stand der Technik durchzuführen, Patentanmeldungen zu erstellen und Wettbewerbslandschaften zu analysieren.
PatSnap-Team für geistiges Eigentum
Patentrecherche und Wettbewerbsbeobachtung · PatSnap
Diese Analyse wurde vom PatSnap IP Intelligence Team erstellt – einer Gruppe aus Patentanalysten, IP-Strategen und Datenwissenschaftlern, die täglich mit der globalen Patentdatenbank von PatSnap arbeiten, die über 2 Milliarden strukturierte Datenpunkte aus Patenten, Prozessakten, wissenschaftlicher Literatur und behördlichen Einreichungen umfasst.
Das Team ist darauf spezialisiert, wegweisende Gerichtsurteile zu verfolgen, komplexe Gerichtsentscheidungen in umsetzbare Strategien zum Schutz geistigen Eigentums zu übersetzen und die Auswirkungen auf die Wettbewerbsanalyse für Forschungs- und Entwicklungs- sowie Rechtsabteilungen zu ermitteln. Alle Fallanalysen stützen sich auf Primärquellen: offizielle Gerichtsakten, beim USPTO eingereichte Unterlagen und Urteile des Federal Circuit.
Verwandte Ressourcen
- USPTO Patent Full-Text Database — Search MOSAID patent numbers
- PACER Case Locator — Case Nos. 1:25-cv-00677 (WDTX) and 3:26-cv-246 (D. Oregon)
- Federal Circuit decisions on WDTX venue transfer standards — In re Apple, In re Volkswagen
Dieser Artikel dient ausschließlich zu Informationszwecken und stellt keine Rechtsberatung dar. Alle Angaben zu den Fällen stammen aus öffentlich zugänglichen Gerichtsakten. Informationen zu den Funktionen der Plattform finden Sie auf PatSnap.
📑 Inhaltsverzeichnis
🀗 PatSnap Eureka IP Tools
🔍Neuheitensuche
Sofortigen Zugriff auf den Stand der Technik
Patententwurf
KI-gestützte Schadenbearbeitung
FTO-Analyse
Risiko einer Rechtsverletzung bewerten
Sind Sie besorgt wegen Ihres Produkts?
Warten Sie nicht, bis es zu einem Rechtsstreit kommt. Prüfen Sie jetzt die Rechtssicherheit Ihres Produkts mithilfe einer KI-gestützten Analyse.
FTO für mein Produkt ausführen