The NetApp Litigation (continued)
Today, we filed a second complaint against NetApp for infringement of six additional patents and other related claims. Although it may appear a separate case, it is in reality, part of the same litigation originally brought by NetApp in Eastern Texas to impede the adoption of ZFS. There are many theories as to why NetApp chose this particular venue, but because they sued Sun in that location we were forced to respond there. And, that is what we did last Thursday.
The case we filed today is in the Northern District of California. While we dislike the fact that we are forced to litigate this matter at all, we believe California is a more appropriate forum for any dispute between Sun and NetApp. Why? For starters, our companies are headquartered less than 10 miles apart here in Silicon Valley. All of the key witnesses in this case are located here, as are our attorneys. The same for most of the documentary evidence. And, almost all of the technology in dispute was developed here as well.
So to us, it makes more sense in terms of efficiency and economy, that this case be litigated here. With this in mind, we will be bringing a motion before the court in California asking that the case filed in Texas be consolidated with the case filed by Sun today for trial here in the Bay Area. Bottom line, this move would be in the best interest of all parties involved...especially our respective shareholders. We hope that NetApp agrees.
Posted on 10:58AM Oct 29, 2007 | Comments[6]
Share this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't that court in Eastern Texas well known for its uncommon track record? Surely proximity is not your only reason for wanting to change venue.
Posted by Ben Donley on October 29, 2007 at 11:39 AM PDT #
To answer Mr. Donley, I would turn that around.
California is the obvious location to file. The fact that NetApp went venue shopping would seem to indicate that they do not have confidence in the merits of their case in the natural venue.
Posted by Brian Utterback on October 29, 2007 at 11:58 AM PDT #
Beautiful counter move. I hope the motion will be accepted (any reason why it would not be?).
Posted by Marcelo on October 29, 2007 at 01:47 PM PDT #
NetApp obviously see's value in ZFS, and they are looking for quick resolution in Texas, hopefully they don't find it
Posted by James Brown on October 29, 2007 at 03:35 PM PDT #
Great post. P.S. your email is down. May I suggest that you change the visual contrast on your blog (light text on light background = excessively eye straining layout). Just a suggestion. Thanks.
Posted by Ewen on October 29, 2007 at 04:08 PM PDT #
How is the technology in question similar to or different from DEC's Spiralog technology, introduced more than a decade ago, which was also very much a copy on write technology with great snapshotting and performance streamlining capabilities?
Posted by John Stoker on October 30, 2007 at 08:00 AM PDT #