From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
O2 Micro Intern. Ltd. v. Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
467 F.3d 1355, 80 U.S.P.Q.2d 1769 (2006)
O2 Micro International Limited and O2 Micro, Inc. (collectively, O2 Micro) (plaintiffs) filed a claim for patent infringement against Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (Monolithic) (defendant) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The preliminary infringement contentions filed by O2 rested on one theory of infringement. After a claim-construction hearing, O2 served its final infringement contentions, which relied solely on the previously identified theory of infringement. The discovery process continued, and O2 deposed James Moyer, Monolithic’s chief integrated-circuit engineer. Almost three months after deposing Moyer, O2 sent supplemental infringement contentions to Monolithic that relied on a new theory of infringement, which O2 stated it discovered during Moyer’s deposition. O2 offered no explanation for the delay of several months in amending the contentions. Monolithic objected to the new contentions based on the new theory of infringement. O2 formally filed a motion to amend two weeks after sending the supplemental contentions. O2’s motion for leave to amend the contentions was denied. Monolithic filed a motion for summary judgment for noninfringement. In its response to the motion for summary judgment, O2 raised a new, third theory of infringement. The court granted the motion for summary judgment, relying solely on the initial theory expressed in the preliminary and final infringement contentions and finding no support for that theory in the record. O2 appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Dyk, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 605,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 605,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.