CAFC Reverses Noninfringement Ruling in VLSI v. Intel $3 Billion Patent Dispute

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential opinion on April 14, 2026, reversing a district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation (Case No. 24-1772). The case involves U.S. Patent No. 8,566,836 (the “836 patent”), which covers methods and apparatuses for selecting processor cores in multicore systems based on performance parameters. The dispute is part of a broader litigation series with approximately $3 billion at stake.

Background

The 836 patent, titled “Multi-core System on Chip,” was originally developed by Freescale Semiconductor (later NXP Semiconductors) and subsequently acquired by VLSI Technology, a patent assertion entity backed by Fortress Investment Group. VLSI has been pursuing infringement claims against Intel since 2017, resulting in multiple jury verdicts totaling over $3 billion across several patents.

District Court Rulings

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California had granted Intel’s motion for summary judgment on two grounds. First, the court found that the alleged infringing acts occurred outside the United States (extraterritoriality). Second, it rejected VLSI’s doctrine of equivalents (DOE) theory. The court also excluded certain damages theories from VLSI’s expert, Dr. Sullivan, including NPV and VPU methodologies.

CAFC Decision

Writing for the court, Chief Judge Moore reversed the summary judgment on both grounds. On extraterritoriality, the CAFC held that a pretrial stipulation between the parties established a sufficient U.S. nexus for the infringement claims. The court further found that genuine disputes of material fact existed regarding whether the accused products were “reasonably capable of performing the claimed functions.”

The Federal Circuit also reversed the DOE-related summary judgment for certain apparatus claims, finding that VLSI had raised sufficient factual disputes.

Implications for the Industry

This decision has broad relevance for semiconductor patent disputes. The forthcoming jury trial will attract significant attention from the technology sector.

Next Steps

The case is remanded to the Northern District of California for jury trial. Intel is separately pursuing a license defense based on Fortress’s control over VLSI, following a May 2025 Texas jury verdict that recognized this relationship. The ultimate outcome of this multibillion-dollar litigation series will have significant implications for large-scale patent assertion campaigns.