Untitled case

Case Overview and Background: Yangtze Memory Technologies Co. Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc. et al.

This patent infringement litigation, case number 3:23-cv-05792, is active in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff is Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. (YMTC), a Chinese semiconductor integrated device manufacturer (IDM) specializing in 3D NAND flash memory chips. YMTC is an operating company known for its Xtacking architecture and has received state-linked investments. The defendants are Micron Technology, Inc., and its subsidiary Micron Consumer Products Group, LLC. Micron is an American multinational semiconductor company that designs and manufactures computer memory and data storage products, including DRAM and NAND flash memory, making it a direct competitor and also an operating company. The lawsuit alleges that Micron's 3D NAND products, including its 96-Layer, 128-Layer, 176-Layer, and 232-Layer NAND products, as well as certain DDR5 DRAM products, infringe YMTC's patents. The case was filed on November 9, 2023.

U.S. Patent No. 10,879,164, along with 18 other patents, is asserted in this case, forming part of a larger 19-patent dispute. The technical details of U.S. Patent No. 10,879,164 specifically relate to semiconductor devices, particularly advancements in 3D NAND flash memory technology. The procedural posture of the case is before Judge Rita F. Lin in the Northern District of California. The case has been consolidated with a related action (3:24-cv-04223-RFL) and is currently stayed by the court pending the resolution of Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings filed by Micron against YMTC's patents.

This litigation is notable for several reasons. It represents a significant intellectual property battle between two major players in the global semiconductor industry, particularly in the competitive 3D NAND flash memory market. A key development in the case involved a discovery dispute where Micron sought to block YMTC's access to highly confidential source code, citing national security concerns given YMTC's Chinese ties and its designation as a "military company" by the U.S. Department of Defense. Micron's efforts to overturn the discovery order, which allowed YMTC's outside counsel to review portions of the source code, ultimately reached the Federal Circuit and then the U.S. Supreme Court via a petition for a writ of mandamus, both of which were denied. The extensive IPR challenges initiated by Micron against YMTC's asserted patents also highlight the intense nature of this dispute and the strategic use of parallel proceedings to challenge patent validity.

The patent infringement litigation case 3:23-cv-05792, initially identified by Google Patents as being in the California Eastern District Court, is more accurately identified by docket searches as Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc., et al. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The case was filed on November 9, 2023, and involves patent 10879164, among others. As of the current date, the case appears to be active, with ongoing pre-trial proceedings.

Here is a chronological summary of the key legal developments:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• November 9, 2023: Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. (Plaintiff) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron Consumer Products Group, LLC (Defendants) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, case number 3:23-cv-05792. The cause of action is patent infringement.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• The docket indicates active pre-trial proceedings. For example, there was a stipulation with a proposed order filed on February 28, 2025, allowing one expert deposition after March 3, 2025, which was related to the claim construction discovery deadline.
• A related case, 3:24-cv-04223, was consolidated into 3:23-cv-05792, and the clerk was directed to close the consolidated case (3:24-cv-04223), with all future submissions to be filed under 3:23-cv-05792.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

• While a final Markman order is not explicitly detailed in the provided snippets, the mention of a "Claim Construction Discovery Deadline" of March 3, 2025, suggests that the claim construction phase is underway or has recently concluded. This indicates the case has progressed beyond initial pleadings and is moving towards defining the scope of the patent claims.

4. Discovery Milestones:

• A significant discovery milestone was the "Claim Construction Discovery Deadline" on March 3, 2025, indicating that discovery related to claim construction was active and had a set deadline.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-trial Motions:

• Given the filing date of November 9, 2023, and the ongoing claim construction phase, the case has not yet reached trial.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal – Present Posture:

• The case is currently active and proceeding through pre-trial phases. While one search result listed the case as "Closed", this likely refers to the status of older entries or specific aspects, as other, more recent entries confirm ongoing activity and consolidation of related cases into 3:23-cv-05792.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• There is a parallel proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) related to one of the patents at issue, 10879164.
• Specifically, an appeal (Case 26-1110) has been filed with the Federal Circuit by Yangtze Memory Technologies Holding Co Ltd against Micron Technology Inc, originating from PTAB IPR2024-00794, and involves patent '164. This indicates that Micron Technology likely filed an IPR petition challenging the validity of patent 10879164, and the PTAB's decision on that IPR is now being appealed. The outcome of this IPR appeal could significantly impact the district court litigation.

Plaintiff Counsel Identified in Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. v. Micron Technology, Inc. et al. (N.D. Cal. Case No. 3:23-cv-05792-RFL)

While the case was initially listed as being in the California Eastern District Court, numerous docket entries and legal filings consistently identify the court as the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, with Judge Rita F. Lin presiding (Case No. 3:23-cv-05792-RFL). The plaintiff in this patent infringement case is Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd. (YMTC), and the defendants are Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron Consumer Products Group, LLC.

The following attorneys represent the plaintiff, Yangtze Memory Technologies Company, Ltd.:

• James R. Batchelder

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo Alto, CA.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Batchelder is a partner and co-head of Ropes & Gray's IP litigation practice. His experience includes patent infringement litigation across various technologies, including semiconductors, software, and medical devices. He has served as lead counsel in numerous high-stakes patent disputes.

• Andrew T. Radsch

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo Alto, CA.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Radsch is a partner focusing on intellectual property litigation, particularly in patent and trade secret disputes in the semiconductor, software, and electronics industries.

• James F. Mack

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo Alto, CA.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Mack is a counsel at Ropes & Gray with experience in complex patent litigation across a range of technologies, including semiconductors, medical devices, and software.

• Nancy N. Attalla

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo Alto, CA.
  • Experience Note: Ms. Attalla is an associate at Ropes & Gray whose practice focuses on patent litigation.

• Stepan Starchenko

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo Alto, CA.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Starchenko is a counsel at Ropes & Gray, involved in patent and other intellectual property litigation. His background is in electrical engineering.

• Rachael Bacha

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, New York, NY.
  • Experience Note: Ms. Bacha is a partner at Ropes & Gray focusing on intellectual property litigation, including patent infringement disputes, particularly in the life sciences and technology sectors.

• Nicole S. L. Pobre

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Ropes & Gray LLP, Washington, D.C.
  • Experience Note: Ms. Pobre is a partner at Ropes & Gray, specializing in intellectual property litigation, including patent cases before district courts and the ITC.

Micron Technology, Inc. and Micron Consumer Products Group, LLC are represented by a team of attorneys from two prominent law firms: Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale) and Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP (Finnegan).

Here are the details of the counsel of record for the defendants:

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale)

• Firm Office Location: Palo Alto, California, and other offices globally. WilmerHale is recognized for its abilities in handling high-tech patent infringement proceedings and inter partes reviews (IPRs).
• Attorneys:
  • Mark D. Selwyn: (Lead Counsel) Partner in the Litigation/Controversy Department, specializing in intellectual property litigation. He has represented clients in numerous patent and IP cases in federal courts and before the International Trade Commission (ITC), including prominent Silicon Valley technology companies. He has been recognized as a leading IP practitioner and a "Top Intellectual Property Lawyer in California" by the Daily Journal multiple times.
  • Robert J. Gunther Jr.: (Lead Counsel) Partner with over 35 years of experience as a trial lawyer in intellectual property and technology litigation, particularly for life sciences, pharmaceutical, and technology clients at both trial and appellate levels. He has been recognized by Chambers Global and Chambers USA for intellectual property patent law.
  • Taylor Gooch: (Counsel) Focuses on complex intellectual property and patent litigation, representing clients in US district courts, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the US International Trade Commission. He also has experience with matters before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), including IPR proceedings, and his cases have involved solid state memory technology.
  • Kathleen M. Sullivan: (Of Counsel/Appellate Specialist - Note: Ms. Sullivan retired from Quinn Emanuel in 2025; her current role with WilmerHale in this active case should be verified with recent docket entries if possible to confirm her involvement post-retirement from her previous firm.) She is a highly distinguished appellate lawyer, former Dean of Stanford Law School, and has argued 11 times in the U.S. Supreme Court. While she retired from Quinn Emanuel in 2025, her expertise in high-stakes appeals, including design patent damages cases like Samsung v. Apple, is notable. Rejoining WilmerHale as senior counsel was announced in May 2025.

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP (Finnegan)

• Firm Office Location: Palo Alto, California, and other offices globally. Finnegan is one of the largest IP-focused law firms globally, offering full-service IP legal and technical experience across various industries, including semiconductors. They handle extensive patent litigation across district courts, the ITC, the PTAB, the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Attorneys:
  • Nathaniel T. Browand: (Lead Counsel) Partner specializing in intellectual property law, with a strong emphasis on patent litigation, transactional work, and counseling. He has extensive experience litigating patent and other IP cases before US district courts and the ITC, and serves as lead counsel in IPR and post-grant review proceedings before the PTAB. His experience includes complex technologies such as semiconductors.
  • Jeffrey D. Smyth: (Counsel) Focuses on intellectual property litigation across a diverse range of fields, including pharmaceuticals and life sciences technologies, with experience before U.S. district courts, the PTAB, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

In-House Counsel for Micron Technology, Inc.:

• Michael Ray: Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary at Micron Technology. He is responsible for Micron's global legal, compliance, and intellectual property functions. He was appointed to this position in January 2024 and has nearly 30 years of legal experience, including a significant tenure at Western Digital as chief legal officer.