Power Integrations Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International Inc. et al

Filing 970

MEMORANDUM ORDER re Pretrial Order and schedule for submission of supplemental letters. Signed by Judge Leonard P. Stark on 10/22/18. (ntl)

IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

POWER INTEGRATIONS INC.,
Plaintiff,
V.

Civil Action No. 08-309-LPS
FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR
INTERNATIONAL INC. , FAIRCHILD
SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, and
FAIRCHILD (TAIWAN) CORPORATION,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ORDER

At Wilmington this 22nd day of October, 2018:
Having reviewed the parties' proposed pretrial order (D.I. 968, 969) ("PTO"), IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:

1

With respect to PTO 137: the parties shall provide their statement to the Court

regarding any remaining issues relating to Arthur Kelley and Jacob Baker no later than October
24.

2.

With respect to PTO 158: if Power Integrations truly "intends to seek damages on

worldwide sales" at this late date, and notwithstanding the various representations it has made
and the minimal expert analysis it has disclosed, then the parties shall provide the Court with
additional assistance, including their views on (a) how the Court could find it appropriate to
permit Power Integrations to seek damages on worldwide sales; (b) what, if any, discovery and/or
expert report Fairchild should be provided as a consequence; (c) whether both sides can fully and
fairly prepare while retaining the November 5 trial date; and (d) whether, if the Court agrees to
permit Power Integrations to seek damages on worldwide sales, it should certify its order for

interlocutory appeal and cancel trial. The parties' submissions shall not exceed five (5) pages
single-spaced and are due on October 23 (Power Integrations) and October 24 (Fairchild).
3.

With respect to Exhibits 16 and 17, and what (if anything) the jury should be told

about prior litigation, including reexaminations, the Court' s inclination is not to permit the jury
to learn anything about any prior litigation or any reexamination. That is, the Court is not
inclined to permit Exhibit 16 or 17 to be presented to the jury, nor for the information contained
in either exhibit to be presented to the jury in any manner. The parties shall meet and confer and,
should either party wish for the Court to further consider its inclination, that party shall, no later
than October 25 at 12:00 p.m., submit a supplemental letter brief explaining with particularity
how it would be unfairly prejudiced by the Court adhering to its inclination. In any such
submission, such party shall provide its position on whether, should the Court agree to permit the
jury to learn anything of prior litigation and reexaminations, it should follow a procedure similar
to that employed in GN Netcom, Inc. v. Plantronics, Inc., C.A. No. 12-1318 (see, e.g. , D.I. 502 at
5-8 ; D.I. 553 at 253-58), in doing so.

LELEONARDP. STARK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT