Mentor sues Aptix over Quickturn case

Mentor sues Aptix over Quickturn case
By Richard Goering, EE Times
October 13, 2000 (11:43 a.m. EST)
URL: http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20001009S0062

WILSONVILLE, Ore. — The failed attempt by Mentor Graphics and Aptix Corp. to sue the Quickturn subsidiary of Cadence Design Systems has now turned into a three-way battle, with Mentor filing a new lawsuit that accuses Aptix of fraud and civil conspiracy. Mentor is seeking to recoup its legal costs from a suit it filed with Aptix against Quickturn that was dismissed in June.

The original case developed when Mentor paid $1 million to license an Aptix patent in Feb. 1998 for the apparent purpose of suing Quickturn, which had engaged in patent litigation with Mentor for years. Mentor lent Aptix $3 million and agreed to front all legal expenses for a suit, which was filed in late Feb. 1998. But the gambit backfired when a federal court judge ruled this past June that Amr Mohsen, president and chief executive officer of Aptix, had committed fraud.

In a 60-page document, Judge William Alsup of U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., ruled that Mohsen and his brother had fabricated entries in an engineering document in an attempt to establish the date the disputed patent was invented. In September, Alsup ordered Aptix to pay Quickturn $4.2 million in legal fees, and he ruled that the Aptix patent was invalid.

Aptix has denied any wrongdoing and has filed an appeal contesting Judge Alsup's rulings. Mitch Underseth, chief financial officer of Aptix, rejected the claims in the Mentor lawsuit as well.

"Aptix completely denies all allegations in the [Mentor] suit and will defend itself vigorously," said Underseth. "Aptix will not permit this action by Mentor to de-focus it from its core business."

The federal court's June and September decisions left Mentor holding the bag, said Deen Freed, legal counsel for Mentor, based here. "Mentor Graphics was expressly found to have not committed any wrongdoing," he said. "We're the victim her e. We've been injured."

Mentor is asking for a return of the legal fees it paid for the Quickturn case, which Freed estimated in the $5 million-to-$10 million range. Mentor's suit also asks for unspecified compensatory damages stemming from "loss of competitive advantage" due to its inability to assert the patent.

Although Freed said Mentor was "in essence" making use of the licensed patent, he said the ongoing litigation and the revocation of the patent will have no impact on the company's Celaro emulation systems.

Mentor is currently awaiting Aptix's response, and no court dates have been scheduled. "As with most lawsuits, this will start slowly," said Freed. Mentor is also involved in an unrelated patent infringement lawsuit against Quickturn.