Lam Research Corp. v. Schunk Semiconductor

Good Law
65 F. Supp. 3d 863·2014 WL 4180935·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118322
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 22, 2014No. C-03-1335 EMC; Docket Nos. 331, 346California4,141 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chen, J.

ORDER DENYING XYCARB’S MOTION TO BIFURCATE AND LAM’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

Pending before the Court are Defendant Xycarb Ceramic’s (“Xycarb”) motion to bifurcate this action into two trials — one for liability and one for damages — and Plaintiff Lam Research Corporation’s (“Lam”) motion for partial summary judgment. The Court finds these motions suitable for disposition without a hearing and therefore VACATES the hearings set for August 28, 2014 (Xycarb’s motion to bifurcate) and September 4, 2014 (Lam’s motion for partial summary judgment). For the following reasons, the Court will DENY both motions.

DISCUSSION

I. Xycarb’s Motion to Bifurcate Trial into Liability and Damages Phases Is Denied

Xycarb has moved to bifurcate the trial into separate liability and damage phases. Xycarb contends that bifurcation will prevent juror confusion given the complicated nature of the damages questions in this case. It further contends that because it is overwhelmingly likely to prevail on the question of liability given this Court’s claim construction, bifurcation will likely eliminate the need for a trial on damages and will allow the parties to avoid expense in…

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.