Gazelle Microcircuits Inc, Santa Clara, California filed a motion in US District Court, San Jose, alleging that Advanced Micro Devices Inc’s patent related to the Am22V10 logic device, which Gazelle is accused of infringing, is invalid: Gazelle has already countersued, alleging fraud on the basis that the patent is invalid in light of a prior AMD product, and it wants punitive damages of $50m and costs, dismissal of the AMD complaint, judgement that the patent is invalid, and an injunction against all persons, especially AMD salespeople, from charging it with infringement; Gazelle says it has a written and signed declaration from the first-named inventor on the AMD patent, Paul Harvey, which states that, had he known of the Am9513 output structure, said to be near identical to the aspect of the Am22V10 that carries the patent, he would not have applied for the patent as it now stands; an enraged Gazelle says AMD should know that there is no basis for a suit, but it filed the suit anyway as an attempt to scare our customers and investors – we feel that the lawsuit has absolutely no merit, is an improper use of the patent law and wastes the capital of all the parties involved, adding that it is ironic that Jerry Sanders, who is championing the ideas of the patent process, would allow his organisation to abuse that process by filing apparently unfounded lawsuits and by seeking patents through seemingly fraudulent methods – and if all that fails, a Billy Bunterish Gazelle adds as a rejoinder that even if the patent were valid and enforceable, it is noteworthy that the Gazelle devices do not use the output circuit that was patented.
