Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v. Intel Corp. |
---|
 |
Court | United States District Court for the District of Delaware |
---|
Full case name | In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litigation |
---|
Docket nos. | 1:05-cv-00441 1:05-md-01717 |
---|
Citation | 496 F. Supp. 2d 404 (D. Del. 2007) |
---|
|
Prior actions | Consolidated, In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litig., 403 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (J.P.M.L. 2005) |
---|
|
Judge sitting | Joseph James Farnan Jr. |
---|
AMD v. Intel was a private antitrust lawsuit, filed in the United States by Advanced Micro Devices ("AMD") against Intel Corporation in June 2005.
History
AMD launched the lawsuit against its rival Intel, the world's leading microprocessor manufacturer. AMD has claimed that Intel engaged in unfair competition by offering rebates to Japanese PC manufacturers who agreed to eliminate or limit purchases of microprocessors made by AMD or a smaller manufacturer, Transmeta.[1]
The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in June 2005. The case was consolidated with thirteen other antitrust suits against Intel by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in November 2005.[2] In July 2007, U.S. District Judge Joseph James Farnan Jr. largely denied Intel's motion to dismiss.[3] The court date, originally scheduled for April 2009, was pushed back to February 2010.
In February 2009 it was reported that Intel had spent at least $116 million to date on legal representation on the antitrust suit. This was inferred from a $50 million lawsuit filed by Intel against one of its insurers; the lawsuit disclosed that Intel had already exhausted $66 million in coverage from two other insurers while fighting the antitrust lawsuit.[4]
Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Deborah Platt Majoras blocked an inquiry into the matter until her departure in March 2008.[5] In June 2008, new FTC Chairman William Kovacic opened an investigation.[6]
This was not the first time AMD has accused Intel Corp. of abusing their power as the leading manufacturer for x86 processors. In 1991, AMD filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel claiming that they were trying to secure and maintain a monopoly.[7] One year later, a court ruled against Intel, awarding AMD $10 million "plus a royalty-free license to any Intel patents used in AMD's own x86-style processor".[8]
Agreement
In November 2009, Intel agreed to pay AMD $1.25 billion as part of a deal to settle all outstanding legal disputes between the two companies.[9][10][11]
That week, Andrew Cuomo, then the Attorney General of New York, who had access to the 200 million documents in discovery and 2,200 hours of witness depositions from the private lawsuit, filed another antitrust lawsuit under similar allegations.[12] That lawsuit was ultimately settled in 2012 by Cuomo's successor for $6.5 million.[13]
In December 2009, the FTC sued Intel.[14] On August 4, 2010, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz reached a settlement agreement with Intel in which the company agreed to modify its rebate practices and establish a $10 million fund for misled customers.[15][16]
International actions
In 2005, the Japan Fair Trade Commission issued Intel a cease and desist order.[17] On June 4, 2008, Korea Fair Trade Commission fined Intel US$25.4 million for giving Samsung rebates to not use AMD processors.[18] Some of the manufacturers involved in the case were Dell, HP, Gateway, Acer, Fujitsu, Sony, Toshiba, and Hitachi.[19][20]
In May 2009, the European Commissioner for Competition, Neelie Kroes, fined Intel a record $1.45 billion (€1.06 billion) and ordered it to end its customer rebate program.[21][22]
In 2022 the €1.06 billion fine was dropped, but was successively re-imposed in September 2023 as a €376.36 million fine. [23]
References
- ^ Michael Singer; Dawn Kawamoto. "AMD files antitrust suit against Intel". CNET. Retrieved June 25, 2008.
- ^ In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litig., 403 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (J.P.M.L. 2005).
- ^ In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litig., 496 F. Supp. 2d 404 (D. Del. 2007).
- ^ "Intel Sues an Insurer Over Litigation Costs", Clark, Don.The Wall Street Journal, Monday, February 2, 2009, page B7.
- ^ Labaton, Stephen (October 22, 2007). "F.T.C. Chief Balks at Intel Inquiry". The New York Times. p. A1. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ Labaton, Stephen (June 7, 2008). "In Turnabout, Antitrust Unit Looks at Intel". The New York Times. p. A1. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ 756 F. Supp. 1292 (1991) INTEL CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., Defendant. And Related Counterclaims
- ^ Michael Singer. "Intel and AMD: A long history in court", CNET.com, June 28, 2005. Retrieved on 2008-06-25.
- ^ US chip maker Intel has agreed to pay rival AMD $1.25bn as part of a deal to settle all outstanding legal disputes between the two companies. "[1] Archived 2009-11-15 at the Wayback Machine"
- ^ Juliana Gruenwald. "Intel Settles Lawsuit With AMD Archived January 25, 2010, at the Wayback Machine", NationalJournal.com, Tech Daily Dose, Thursday, November 12, 2009.
- ^ In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litig. (Settlement Agreement Between Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and Intel Corporation) (D. Del. November 11, 2009).
- ^ Lohr, Steve; Kanter, James (November 13, 2009). "Intel Pays A.M.D. $1.25 Billion to Settle Disputes". The New York Times. p. B1. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ Freifeld, Karen; Stempel, Jonathan (February 9, 2012). "Intel settles NY antitrust case for just $6.5 million". Reuters. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ Lohr, Steve (December 17, 2009). "F.T.C. Accuses Intel of Trying to Stifle Competition". The New York Times. p. B1. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ Wyatt, Edward; Vance, Ashlee (August 5, 2010). "Intel Settles With F.T.C. on Antitrust Complaint". The New York Times. p. B1. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ "FTC Settles Charges of Anticompetitive Conduct Against Intel". Federal Trade Commission (Press release). August 4, 2010. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ The Editorial Board (June 15, 2008). "Editorial: The Intel Antitrust Investigation". The New York Times. p. WK11.
- ^ "South Korea to Fine Intel $25.4 Million for Trade Violations". The New York Times. The Associated Press. June 5, 2008. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ Ann Steffora Mutschler. "Intel, AMD antitrust trial pushed back", Electronic News, June 6, 2008. Retrieved on 2008-06-25.
- ^ Arik Hesseldahl. "AMD Files Antitrust Suit Against Intel", Forbes, June 28, 2006. Retrieved on 2008-06-25.
- ^ Kanter, James (May 13, 2009). "Europe Fines Intel a Record $1.45 Billion in Antitrust Case". The New York Times. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ "Case search – Competition - 37990 Intel". ec.europa.eu. European Commission. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
- ^ "Antitrust: Commission re-imposes €376.36 million fine on Intel for anticompetitive practices in the market for computer chips". ec.europa.eu. September 23, 2023. Archived from the original on October 24, 2023. Retrieved October 30, 2023.
United States antitrust law |
---|
- History
- Interstate Commerce Commission (1887–1996)
- Bureau of Corporations (1903–1915)
- Pujo Committee (1912–1913)
- Federal Trade Commission (1914–)
- U.S. Justice Department Antitrust Division (1919–)
- U.S. Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee
- U.S. House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee
|
Statutes and regulations |
- Interstate Commerce Act of 1887
- Sherman Antitrust Act (1890)
- Elkins Act (1903)
- Expediting Act (1903)
- Publicity In Taking Evidence Act (1913)
- Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914
- Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914
- Webb–Pomerene Act (1918)
- Willis Graham Act (1921)
- Capper–Volstead Act (1922)
- Robinson–Patman Act (1936)
- Wheeler–Lea Act (1938)
- McCarran–Ferguson Act (1945)
- Celler–Kefauver Act (1950)
- Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961
- Newspaper Preservation Act of 1970
- Tunney Act (1974)
- Hart–Scott–Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act (1976)
- National Cooperative Research and Production Act (1993)
- Executive Order 14036 (2021)
|
---|
Supreme Court case law | Sherman Antitrust Act Section 1 case law |
- United States v. American Tobacco Co. (1911)
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. (1940)
- International Salt Co. v. United States (1947)
- United States v. Line Material Co. (1948)
- Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Seagram & Sons, Inc. (1951)
- United States v. New Wrinkle, Inc. (1952)
- United States v. Loew's Inc. (1962)
- United States v. Wise (1962)
- Silver v. New York Stock Exchange (1963)
- United States v. Singer Mfg. Co. (1963)
- Albrecht v. Herald Co. (1968)
- United States v. Glaxo Group Ltd. (1973)
- Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar (1975)
- Continental Television, Inc. v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. (1977)
- Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois (1977)
- Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society (1982)
- Rice v. Norman Williams Co. (1982)
- Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp. (1984)
- Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 v. Hyde (1984)
- NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma (1984)
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986)
- State Oil Co. v. Khan (1997)
- Texaco Inc. v. Dagher (2006)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (2007)
- Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. (2007)
- American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League (2010)
- Ohio v. American Express Co. (2018)
- National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston (2021)
|
---|
Sherman Antitrust Act Section 2 case law |
- Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States (1911)
- Lorain Journal Co. v. United States (1951)
- Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp. (1965)
- Otter Tail Power Co. v. United States (1973)
- Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. (1985)
- Spectrum Sports, Inc. v. McQuillan (1993)
- Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP (2004)
- Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Co. (2007)
- Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. linkLine Communications, Inc. (2009)
|
---|
Other Sherman Antitrust Act cases |
- United States v. E. C. Knight Co. (1895)
- United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association (1897)
- Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. United States (1899)
- Northern Securities Co. v. United States (1904)
- Swift & Co. v. United States (1905)
- Loewe v. Lawlor (1908)
- Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. (1911)
- United States v. Terminal Railroad Association (1912)
- Chicago Board of Trade v. United States (1918)
- United States v. Colgate & Co. (1919)
- Federal Baseball Club v. National League (1922)
- United States v. General Electric Co. (1926)
- Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States (1939)
- Ethyl Gasoline Corp. v. United States (1940)
- Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC (1941)
- United States v. Masonite Corp. (1942)
- United States v. Univis Lens Co. (1942)
- Parker v. Brown (1943)
- United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n (1944)
- Associated Press v. United States (1945)
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States (1945)
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. (1946)
- United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. (1948)
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co. (1948–1950)
- Besser Manufacturing Co. v. United States (1951)
- Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United States (1953)
- Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc. (1953)
- United States v. International Boxing Club of New York, Inc. (1955)
- Radovich v. National Football League (1957)
- Klor's, Inc. v. Broadway-Hale Stores, Inc. (1959)
- United States v. Parke, Davis & Co. (1960)
- Haywood v. National Basketball Association (1971)
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1971)
- Flood v. Kuhn (1972)
- Broadcast Music, Inc. v. CBS Inc. (1979)
- California Retail Liquor Dealers Ass'n v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc. (1980)
- American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc. v. Hydrolevel Corp. (1982)
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. (1985)
- Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. (1992)
- Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California (1993)
- Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. (2006)
- North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC (2015)
|
---|
Interstate Commerce Act case law |
- United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association (1897)
- United States v. ICC (1970)
|
---|
Clayton Antitrust Act case law |
- Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering (1921)
- Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC (1941)
- Mercoid cases (1944)
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States (1945)
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. (1946)
- United States v. National City Lines Inc. (1948)
- Standard Oil Co. v. United States (1949)
- Tampa Electric Co. v. Nashville Coal Co. (1961)
- Silver v. New York Stock Exchange (1963)
- United States v. Philadelphia National Bank (1963)
- United States v. Continental Can Co. (1964)
- FTC v. Consolidated Foods Corp. (1965)
- Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp. (1965)
- FTC v. Dean Foods Co. (1966)
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1971)
- Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. of California (1972)
- Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois (1977)
- Pfizer Inc. v. Government of India (1978)
- Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (1993)
- Apple Inc. v. Pepper (2019)
|
---|
FTC Act case law |
- Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC (1941)
- FTC v. Motion Picture Advertising Service Co. (1953)
- FTC v. Sperry & Hutchinson Trading Stamp Co. (1972)
- FTC v. Actavis, Inc. (2013)
|
---|
Robinson–Patman Act case law |
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986)
- Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (1993)
|
---|
Other cases |
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co. (1908)
- Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab & Transfer Co. (1928)
- Watson v. Buck (1941)
- National Broadcasting Co. v. United States (1943)
- Dawson Chemical Co. v. Rohm & Haas Co. (1980)
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman (1983)
- Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Billing (2007)
- Comcast Corp. v. Behrend (2013)
- Animal Science Products v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceuticals (2018)
|
---|
|
---|
Other federal case law |
- United States v. Motion Picture Patents Co. (1915)
- United States v. Consolidated Music Corporation (1922)
- United States v. Vehicular Parking Ltd. (1944)
- United States v. Alcoa (1945)
- Gamco, Inc. v. Providence Fruit & Produce Building, Inc. (1952)
- United States v. Morgan (1953)
- United States v. Krasnov (1956)
- United States v. Huck Mfg. Co. (1965)
- Robertson v. National Basketball Ass'n (1977)
- SmithKline Corp. v. Eli Lilly & Co. (1978)
- United States v. Westinghouse Electric Co. (1981)
- United States v. AT&T (1982)
- Mid-South Grizzlies v. National Football League (1983)
- United States v. Syufy Enterprises (1990)
- Wilk v. American Medical Association (1990)
- A.D. Bedell Wholesale Co., Inc. v. Philip Morris Inc. (2001)
- United States v. Microsoft Corp. (2001)
- Fraser v. Major League Soccer (2002)
- LePage's, Inc. v. 3M (2003)
- (2005)
- United States v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc. (2005)
- Tritent International Corp. v. Kentucky (2006)
- Wallace v. International Business Machines Corp. (2006)
- De Beers antitrust litigation (2008)
- Redbox Automated Retail LLC v. Universal City Studios LLLP (2009)
- Princo Corp. v. ITC (2010)
- United States v. Adobe Systems Inc., et al. (2011)
- United States v. Apple Inc. (2013)
- O'Bannon v. NCAA (2015)
- United States v. AT&T (2015)
- FTC v. Qualcomm (2020)
- New York v. Deutsche Telekom (2020)
- Epic Games v. Apple (2021)
- Burnett v. National Association of Realtors (2023)
- Epic Games v. Google (2023)
- FTC v. Microsoft (2023)
- United States v. Google LLC (2024)
- United States v. Google LLC (2025)
|
---|
Ongoing litigation ‡ |
- FTC v. Meta (2020)
- FTC v. Amazon (2023)
- United States v. Apple Inc. (2024)
- United States v. Live Nation Entertainment (2024)
|
---|
Related topics |
- Block booking
- Breakup of the Bell System
- Bulk-sale restriction
- Bundling
- Civil investigative demand
- Consent decree
- Consumer welfare standard
- Dividing territories
- Essential facilities doctrine
- Exclusive dealing
- Hub-and-spoke conspiracy
- Kingsbury Commitment
- Merger guidelines
- Modification of Final Judgment
- New Brandeis movement
- Noerr–Pennington doctrine
- Osteopathic Physicians & Surgeons v. California Medical Ass'n (1964)
- Parker immunity doctrine
- Patent misuse
- Post-sale restraint
- Raising rivals' costs
- Relevant market
- Report on Chain Broadcasting
- Reverse payment patent settlement
- Rule of reason
- Second request
- Successors of Standard Oil
- Unfairness doctrine
- Unilateral policy
|
---|
‡ date of filing |
|
---|
Subsidiaries | |
---|
Joint venture | 4Group Holdings (50% owned by Vantiva) |
---|
Products |
|
---|
Litigation |
- High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation
- Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
- Intel Corp. v. Hamidi
- Intel Corporation Inc. v CPM United Kingdom Ltd
- Silvaco Data Systems v. Intel Corp.
|
---|
People | |
---|
Related | |
---|