Atmel Corp. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine

Good Law
426 F. Supp. 2d 1039·2005 WL 2562626·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27277
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 11, 2005C 04-04082 SICalifornia5,043 words

Opinion

Opinion

Illston, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF SHELLY KNOX

On October 7, 2005, the Court heard oral argument on plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, the Court hereby GRANTS in part and DENIES in part plaintiffs motion, and DENIES defendant’s motion to strike the Supplemental Declaration of Shelly Knox.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Atmel Corporation (“Atmel”) is a company that manufactures computer chips. Atmel obtained general liability and errors and omissions insurance from defendant St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company (“St.Paul”) beginning January 1, 2002. This lawsuit arises out of St. Paul’s refusal to defend Atmel in a now-settled lawsuit brought by one of Atmel’s customers, Seagate Corporation. In that lawsuit, which the parties refer to as the “Seagate Action,” Seagate alleged that At-mel sold it defective computer chips and that Seagate had notified Atmel of the problems in the fall of 2001. St. Paul denied a defense in the Seagate Action and unilaterally rescinded Atmel’s insurance policy on the ground that Atmel knew about…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.