Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Syntronic AB

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 12, 20223:21-cv-03610California1,412 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

20 Plaintiff Cadence makes and licenses software tools used to design integrated circuits and 21 printed circuit boards. Dkt. No. 1 ¶¶ 84-85 (FAC). On May 13, 2021, Cadence filed this action for 22 federal copyright infringement, circumvention of copyright protection systems, and breach of 23 contract. Dkt. No. 1 (Original Complaint). Cadence accuses defendants Syntronic AB, Syntronic 24 Research and Development USA Inc. (“Syntronic USA”), and Syntronic (Beijing) Technology 25 R&D Center Co. (“Syntronic Beijing”) (collectively, “Syntronic”) of, among other things, 26 obtaining, copying, and using Cadence’s software tools without authorization or valid license files. 27 Dkt. No. 26 ¶¶ 125-132 (FAC). On August 11, 2021, after the parties’ Rule 16 conference, Cadence served Defendants with a request to inspect the computers identified by Cadence’s “phone-home” system as using pirated software. Dkt. No. 168-8. Initially, defendants claimed in sworn discovery responses that the requested computers were “no longer within [their] possession, custody, or control.” Dkt. No. 156 at 7. After defendants failed to answer interrogatories…

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.