Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Syntronic AB
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC., Case No. 21-cv-03610-SI
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
v. STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
SYNTRONIC AB, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 95 Defendants.
12 Before the Court is plaintiff Cadence Design Systems, Inc.’s (“Cadence”) Motion to Strike defendants’ affirmative defenses of laches and failure to mitigate damages included in defendants’ answer to plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Dkt. No. 95 (Motion); Dkt. No. 106 (Answer). Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument and therefore VACATES the hearing set for May 13, 2022. For the reasons below, the motion is DENIED. 19 BACKGROUND Plaintiff Cadence makes and licenses software tools used to design integrated circuits and printed circuit boards. Dkt. No. 1 ¶¶ 84-85 (FAC). On May 13, 2021, Cadence filed this action for federal…