Qualcomm, attorneys rebuked for withholding documents in Broadcom case
A federal judge has taken action against Qualcomm and six of its attorneys for improperly withholding 46,000 pages of documents and e-mails in a patent lawsuit the company filed against Broadcom.
By Suzanne Deffree, Managing Editor, News -- EDN, January 9, 2008
A federal judge has taken action against Qualcomm Inc and 6 of its attorneys for improperly withholding 46,000 pages of documents and e-mails in a patent lawsuit the company filed against Broadcom Corp.
The suit began in 2005 when San Diego-based Qualcomm alleged that Irvine, Calif.-based Broadcom was in violation of two of its patents on video compression technology. Broadcom's defense in the case was based on Qualcomm's involvement in the Joint Video Team (JVT), a group that developed the H.264 video compression standard. While Qualcomm argued it was not involved in the group, it lost the case in 2007 when a nine member U.S. District Court jury cleared Broadcom of patent infringement and issued an advisory opinion to the presiding judge that Qualcomm violated a duty to disclose its patents to the JVT, or its parent organization, during the JVT's preparation and eventual adoption of H.264.
In a 48-page decision issued Monday, Magistrate Judge Barbara Major of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, in San Diego, referred to Qualcomm's actions a "monumental and intentional discovery violation" and called upon the State Bar of California to investigate possible ethics violation by the attorneys.
She further ordered Qualcomm to review its procedures and report back to her on its progress at the end of the month. Qualcomm has also been ordered to pay Broadcom some $8.6 million, but Major said that sum will be reduced by the amount Qualcomm is already paying in damages in the case. Major further exonerated another 13 lawyers representing Qualcomm.
"Qualcomm intentionally withheld tens of thousands of decisive documents from its opponent in an effort to win this case and gain a strategic business advantage over Broadcom," Major wrote in her decision. “Producing 1.2 million pages of marginally relevant documents while hiding 46,000 critically important ones does not constitute good faith and does not satisfy either the client's or attorney's discovery obligations."
According to the ruling, Qualcomm did not show any evidence to explain why it did not produce the documents.
In its defense, Qualcomm said in a statement that it “regrets the discovery errors that occurred in this case. However, as we pointed out in our brief to the appellate court, when Qualcomm discovered additional documents after the trial, it produced them and apologized to the court and Broadcom for the errors. These actions defy any suggestion that Qualcomm engaged in intentional misconduct.” The company went on to say it is considering its options, including further appeal.
Broadcom could not be reached by Electronic News for immediate comment.
The ruling comes on the heels on another legal loss for Qualcomm in its continuing battles with Broadcom. On December 31, 2007, a federal judge issued an injunction prohibiting Qualcomm from making, using, and selling certain 3G chipsets and software that infringe three Broadcom patents. That decision stemmed from another 2005 patent case in which Broadcom claimed Qualcomm infringed 10 of its patents related to wired and wireless communications and multimedia processing technologies.
