Cadence Design Systems: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:07, 30 July 2025

Revision as of 20:00, 30 July 2025

Line 387:

==Lawsuits==

*July 28, 2025 (Reuters) - Cadence Design (CDNS.O), opens new tab agreed to plead guilty and pay more than $140 million to resolve U.S. charges for selling its chip design products to a Chinese military university believed to be involved in simulating nuclear explosions, the Justice Department said on Monday. Cadence is accused of violating export controls by illegally selling chip design software and hardware to front companies representing China's National University of Defense Technology.

*'''Avanti Corporation'''{{main|Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Avanti Corp}} From 1995 until 2002, Cadence was involved in a [[Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Avanti Corp|6-year-long legal dispute]]<ref name="bw">[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2001-09-02/the-avant-saga-does-crime-pay Business Week (pay wall)] overview of the entire case, after the criminal trial but before the purchase by [[Synopsys]].</ref> with [[Avanti Corporation]] (brand name "Avant!"), in which Cadence claimed Avanti stole Cadence code, and Avanti denied it. According to Business Week ''"The Avanti case is probably the most dramatic tale of white-collar crime in the history of Silicon Valley"''.<ref name="bw" /> The Avanti executives eventually pleaded ''no contest'' and Cadence received several hundred million dollars in restitution. Avanti was then purchased by [[Synopsys]], which paid $265 million more to settle the remaining claims.<ref>[http://www.eedesign.com/article/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=10806192 EEDesign article] about the final settlement.</ref> The case resulted in a number of [[legal precedent]]s.<ref>[http://direct.bl.uk/research/05/0C/RN149436533.html Cadence v. Avanti: The UTSA and California Trade Secret Law] {{Webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20120707114217/http://direct.bl.uk/research/05/0C/RN149436533.html |date=2012-07-07 }}, Danley, J., Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2004, Vol 19; Part 1, pages 289-308</ref>

*'''Aptix Corporation''' Quickturn Design Systems, a company acquired by Cadence, was involved in a series of legal events with Aptix Corporation. Aptix licensed a patent to [[Mentor Graphics]] and the two companies jointly sued Quickturn over an alleged patent infringement. Amr Mohsen, CEO of Aptix, forged and tampered with legal evidence and was subsequently charged with conspiracy, perjury, and obstruction of justice. Mohsen was arrested after violating his bail agreement by attempting to flee the country. While in jail, Mohsen plotted to intimidate witnesses and kill the federal judge presiding over his case.<ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/20/us/in-courts-threats-have-become-a-fact-of-life.html In Courts, Threats Become Alarming Fact of Life], Deborah Sontag, ''The New York Times'', 20 March 2005</ref> Mohsen was further charged with attempting to delay a federal trial by feigning incompetency.<ref>[http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4049672/Odd-legal-saga-takes-an-ugly-turn Odd legal saga takes an ugly turn], Richard Goering, ''[[EE Times]]'', 02 August 2004</ref><ref>[http://www.eetimes.com/news/design/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=181401328 Jury finds Mohsen guilty of perjury, obstruction of justice], Dylan McGrath, ''[[EE Times]]'', 28 February 2006</ref> Due to the overwhelming misconduct, the judge ruled the lawsuit as unenforceable and Mohsen was sentenced to 17 years in prison.<ref>Bailey, Brian (September 6, 2011). [https://www.eetimes.com/amr-mohsen-a-story-so-bizarre/ "Amr Mohsen – A story so bizarre…"] EETimesRetrieved September 5, 2021</ref> Mentor Graphics subsequently sued Aptix to recoup legal costs. Cadence also sued Mentor Graphics and Aptix to recover legal costs.<ref>Santarini, Michael (February 19, 2003). [https://www.eetimes.com/mentor-loses-patent-suit-against-cadence/ "Mentor loses patent suit against Cadence"] EETimesRetrieved September 5, 2021</ref>