Untitled case

I'll research this case thoroughly before drafting.

The first result gives me a key lead. Let me verify and dig deeper.

Excellent leads. Now let me verify the Federal Circuit appeal, the IPR outcome, and the district court details.

Case Overview and Background

Parties. Federal Circuit No. 2026‑1161 is captioned Yangtze Memory Technologies Co. Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc., an appeal from the PTAB in Micron Technology, Inc. v. Yangtze Memory Technologies Co., Ltd., IPR2024‑00790 (CAFC docket aggregator). Both sides are operating semiconductor companies, not NPEs — this is a competitor-versus-competitor campaign. YMTC is China's flagship 3D NAND flash maker (Wuhan), built around its "Xtacking" architecture; it sued Micron in the U.S. on November 9, 2023, and has since expanded the fight to the UK, the UPC, Germany and China. Micron (Boise, Idaho) is the largest remaining U.S. memory manufacturer; its subsidiary Micron Consumer Products Group LLC (the Crucial-brand consumer SSD business) is a co-defendant. The rhetoric has been unusually political: Micron has argued in PTAB filings that YMTC is effectively Chinese-government-controlled (unnamed real party in interest) and has told the Federal Circuit that YMTC is a state-owned company on a U.S. restricted-export list, while YMTC characterizes itself as a private company with multiple shareholders (Fed. Cir. mandamus order, No. 2025‑117).

Accused technology and patents. YMTC's operative N.D. Cal. infringement contentions accuse Micron's 3D NAND flash generally, by generation — the 96‑layer, 128‑layer, 176‑layer and 232‑layer families, including specific drives such as the Crucial/Micron BX500 2.5" 480GB SSD (128L), Micron 3400 (176L), Micron 2250 (232L), Micron 1300 SATA and c200 (96L), and B27A die — and plead both §271(a)/(

I'll research this case and the patent at issue. Let me run several searches.

Let me dig into the specific docket number and the '031 patent proceedings.

The docket detail is key: 26-1161 is YMTC's appeal from PTAB IPR2024-00790 on the '031 patent. Let me verify more.

I'll research this case carefully. Note that the metadata describes a Federal Circuit appeal, so I need to verify whether there's actually a "plaintiff" in the district-court sense.

Let me dig into the underlying district court case and the Federal Circuit appeal docket.

Now let me pin down the Federal Circuit appeal itself and identify the parties/counsel there.

Bottom line up front: there is no "plaintiff" on the Federal Circuit docket

The case metadata (Fed. Cir. No. 26‑1161, US 10,868,031) describes an appellate proceeding, which is styled appellant v. appellee — not plaintiff v. defendant. I could not retrieve the Federal Circuit docket sheet or any entry of appearance for No. 26‑1161 in my searches, so I cannot name counsel of record on that appeal, and I won't guess at them. Two plausible postures exist for the appeal and I could not verify which is correct: (a) a patent‑owner appeal (YMTC) or petitioner appeal (Micron) from a PTAB Final Written Decision in IPR2024‑00790, Micron Technology, Inc. v. Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. (which is the IPR challenging the '031 patent — confirmed by Micron's PHV motion in that proceeding), or (b) some other order. Anyone naming counsel for 26‑1161 today would be speculating; counsel may not have entered appearances yet.

What I can verify is the plaintiff side of the underlying patent‑infringement action involving the '031 patent, which is almost certainly the source of the appeal.

The underlying plaintiff: Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. ("YMTC")

Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron Consumer Products Group, LLC, No. 3:23‑cv‑05792‑RFL (N.D. Cal.) ("YMTC I"), filed November 9, 2023 before Judge Rita F. Lin. The '031 patent is Exhibit 8 to the complaint ("US_10868031_B2"), one of eight asserted 3D NAND patents. YMTC sued again in July 2024 in No. 3:24‑cv‑04223 (Wilmington/ Oakland, "YMTC II"), which was consolidated into YMTC I on August 21, 2024 (ECF No. 106). Both cases were stayed in March 2025 pending the PTAB IPRs (ECF No. 243).

Note on standing/party identity: YMTC's U.S. subsidiary, Yangtze Memory Technologies, Inc. (Santa Clara, CA), is a co‑party in related matters; the N.D. Cal. plaintiff of record is the Chinese parent, YMTC Co., Ltd.

Plaintiff's counsel of record (district court and PTAB)

The names below come from PTAB powers of attorney and briefing in the Micron/YMTC IPR docket and from N.D. Cal. docket entries. All are on the YMTC side (plaintiff/patent owner).

I'll research this case. Let me start with several searches.

The Appeal No. 26-1161 is Yangtze Memory Technologies Co. Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc., an appeal from PTAB IPR2024-00790 on the '031 patent. Let me dig into the docket and counsel.

Now let me pin down the appeal counsel and the district court docket.

Bottom line up front: the premise needs correcting

26-1161 is not a district-court infringement case. Per the case metadata and the Federal Circuit docket, No. 26-1161 is Yangtze Memory Technologies Co., Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc., filed November 17, 2025, an appeal from the PTAB in IPR2024-00790, which involved U.S. Patent No. 10,868,031 (challenged claims 1–5). There is therefore no "defendant" in 26-1161 — the parties are an appellant and an appellee (with a protective cross-appeal noted at the Board).

• IPR2024-00790 was filed by Micron Technology, Inc. as petitioner on 4/18/2024, instituted 10/28/2024, and resulted in a Final Written Decision on 10/23/2025 holding the challenged claims unpatentable (Judges Kokoski, McGraw, Cygan). (IPR2024-00790 docket; ex parte case page)
• YMTC (patent owner) filed the notice of appeal (Paper 30, 11/5/2025) — the timing matches the 11/17/2025 filing of 26-1161 — and Micron filed a protective notice of cross-appeal (Paper 35, 12/26/2025). A limited remand from the Federal Circuit was docketed at the Board on 1/12/2026, and the Director denied Micron's Director Review request on 3/17/2026. (Board docket; Order Denying Director Review, Paper 38)

The actual patent infringement action — i.e., the case with defendants — is Yangtze Memory Technologies Co., Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron Consumer Products Group, LLC, No. 3:23-cv-05792-RFL (N.D. Cal., filed Nov. 9, 2023, Judge Rita F. Lin), in which the '031 patent is one of eight asserted patents and Micron is the defendant/counterclaim-plaintiff. A second YMTC suit (No. 3:24-cv-04223) was consolidated into it on 8/21/2024. (IPR2025-00245 Mandatory Notice)

I am giving you the defense side for both tracks, plus the YMTC side for context.

---

1. Defense counsel — Micron entities in the N.D. Cal. infringement action (the "defendants")

Firm: Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (Bay Area office: 1000 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, CA). Orrick is Micron's counsel of record in 3:23-cv-05792-RFL; the N.D. Cal. docket excerpt reproduced in the IPR exhibits lists the following as appearing for the Micron defendants: