Amphenol Corp. v. Fractus S.A.

In Patent Infringement Action, Non-Party's Information Is Germane to Claims

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION & ORDER This decision arises out of a patent action in the Eastern District of Texas, Fractus, S.A. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, et al., No. 2:18-cv-00135 (JRG) (E.D. Tex.) (the “underlying action”). Petitioner Amphenol Corporation (“Amphenol”), a nonparty in that action, moves to quash two sets of subpoenas issued by respondent Fractus, S.A. (“Fractus”), the plaintiff in that litigation. Fractus cross-moves to compel compliance with those subpoenas.For the reasons that follow, as to the subpoenas that Fractus served on Amphenol on March 4, 2019, the Court denies Amphenol’s motion to quash and grants Fractus’s motion to compel. As to the subpoenas that Fractus served on March 26, 2019, the Court holds the motions in abeyance pending resolution of the earlier-filed action concerning almost identical subpoenas pending in the District of Connecticut.I. Background¹A. The Underlying LitigationIn the Complaint filed in the underlying action, Fractus, a Spanish antenna technology innovator, Compl. 1, alleges that defendant AT&T Mobility (“AT&T”) infringed Fractus’s patents for certain components of high-performance antennas. On April 9, 2018, the same date that Complaint was filed, Fractus also filed complaints against the three other major U.S. cellular carriers — Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint (together with AT&T, the “Carrier Defendants”) for patent infringement in connection with their antennas. Burton Decl. 3. On May 30, 2018, all four cases were consolidated for pretrial supervision, with the underlying action identified as the lead case. No. 2:18-cv-00135 (JRG) (E.D. Tex.) at Dkt. 19.The Complaint alleges that AT&T’s antennas infringe on 10 separate patents held by Fractus. Compl.

36-135. AT&T sources these antennas, the Complaint alleges, from third- party antenna manufacturers, including Amphenol. Id. 26. Fractus’s Complaint identifies Amphenol’s “Amphenol 6890300″ as one of two “exemplary antenna[s]” that contain allegedly infringing components. Id.

Amphenol Corp. v. Fractus S.A.

In Patent Infringement Action, Non-Party's Information Is Germane to Claims

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal