Advanced Micro Devices Inc. v. Fermat International Inc.

Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) has initiated a Post-Grant Review (PGR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) against Fermat International Inc. concerning US Patent 11886750. AMD is a leading American multinational semiconductor company, renowned for designing and manufacturing central processing units (CPUs), graphics processing units (GPUs), and other high-performance computing components used in PCs, gaming, and data centers, including AI applications. Fermat International Inc. appears to be a Patent Assertion Entity (PAE), also known as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE), as it holds the patent and is asserting it against an operating company like AMD, without public indication of manufacturing or selling products based on the patent. This PGR follows an earlier patent infringement lawsuit filed by Fermat International Inc. against Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (7:26-cv-00011), initiated on January 13, 2026.

The patent at issue, US Patent 11886750, is titled "Analytics, algorithm architecture, and data processing system and method." It describes a system and method that employs a distributed hardware architecture, either independently or with an attendant data structure, for various data processing strategies and data analytics implementations. The patent specifically details a compute node that can operate independently of a host compute system to manage and execute data processing operations, along with a unique algorithm architecture. While the specific accused products in the underlying infringement litigation are not explicitly detailed in the PGR filings, given AMD's core business, the allegations likely pertain to their microprocessors, GPUs, or data center solutions that involve distributed hardware for data processing and analytics.

This case is procedurally situated at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under case number PGR2026-00045, with the petition filed on May 12, 2026, and currently holding a "Pending" status. The PTAB, an administrative body of the USPTO, serves as a critical venue for challenging patent validity, offering a broader array of invalidity grounds for PGRs compared to IPRs, including novelty, obviousness, and subject matter eligibility, within nine months of patent grant. The filing of this PGR by AMD is a common defensive strategy by an alleged infringer to challenge the validity of a patent asserted against them in district court. The pattern of a PAE like Fermat International Inc. asserting patents against a major technology operating company such as AMD, followed by a PTAB challenge, highlights prevalent patent litigation trends and underscores the strategic importance of PTAB proceedings in modern patent disputes.

Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) and Fermat International Inc. are involved in both district court patent infringement litigation and a parallel Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Key Legal Developments:

• Filing of District Court Litigation (2026-01-13):
  Fermat International Inc. initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case, numbered 7:26-cv-00011, was filed on January 13, 2026. This lawsuit asserts claims of patent infringement by AMD.

• Filing of Post-Grant Review (PGR) Petition (2026-05-12):
  Advanced Micro Devices Inc. filed a Post-Grant Review petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on May 12, 2026. This petition, assigned case number PGR2026-00045, challenges the patentability of U.S. Patent 11886750, which is owned by Fermat International Inc. The PGR was likely filed in response to the parallel district court litigation.

Outcome and Current Posture:

• PGR Status - Pending Institution:
  As of May 29, 2026, the Post-Grant Review (PGR2026-00045) is in its very early stages. The PTAB has not yet made a decision on whether to institute the PGR. The Board typically issues an institution decision approximately six months after the petition is filed.
• District Court Status - Early Stages:
  The district court litigation (7:26-cv-00011) is also in its preliminary phases, having been filed in January 2026. No significant pre-trial motions of substance, claim construction, discovery milestones, or trial events have been publicly reported yet due to the early stage of the proceedings.
• No Further Developments to Date:
  Given the recent filing dates of both the district court case and the PGR, there have been no further reported developments regarding pre-trial motions (such as motions to dismiss or for summary judgment), claim construction (Markman) outcomes, significant discovery milestones, trial events, verdicts, post-trial motions, settlements, or appeals in either case. The ultimate outcome of the district court litigation will likely be influenced by the PTAB's decision on institution and the subsequent merits of the PGR if instituted.

The previous searches have confirmed the existence and pending status of PGR2026-00045, with Advanced Micro Devices Inc. as the petitioner. While general information about AMD's in-house counsel (Ava Hahn) and law firms that have represented AMD in other patent litigation (Robins Kaplan LLP, Mintz, Fish & Richardson P.C., Daignault Iyer LLP, Davidson Sheehan LLP) has been found, none of the search results explicitly list the counsel of record who filed the petition for this specific PGR at the PTAB. The PTAB Open Data Portal provides general information about trials but does not detail counsel for specific cases in the snippets provided. Without direct access to the PTAB docket for PGR2026-00045, which would explicitly name the appearing attorneys, this information remains elusive through public web searches.

Therefore, I must conclude that the specific counsel of record for Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in PGR2026-00045 is not publicly available through the performed web searches.

Counsel of Record for Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in PGR2026-00045 v. Fermat International Inc.:

The counsel of record representing Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in Post-Grant Review (PGR) case PGR2026-00045 against Fermat International Inc. at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) could not be definitively identified through publicly available web search results.

While Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) has engaged various law firms for patent litigation and intellectual property matters in the past, including Robins Kaplan LLP, Mintz, Fish & Richardson P.C., Daignault Iyer LLP, and Davidson Sheehan LLP, and has in-house legal leadership such as Ava Hahn (Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary), the specific attorneys who filed the petition for this particular PGR case are not listed in the provided search snippets from PTAB case lists or legal news sources. Access to the official PTAB docket would be required to identify the appearing counsel.The previous searches confirmed the existence and pending status of PGR2026-00045, with Advanced Micro Devices Inc. as the petitioner. While general information about AMD's in-house counsel (Ava Hahn) and law firms that have represented AMD in other patent litigation (Robins Kaplan LLP, Mintz, Fish & Richardson P.C., Daignault Iyer LLP, Davidson Sheehan LLP) has been found, none of the search results explicitly list the counsel of record who filed the petition for this specific PGR at the PTAB. The PTAB Open Data Portal provides general information about trials but does not detail counsel for specific cases in the snippets provided. Without direct access to the PTAB docket for PGR2026-00045, which would typically list the appearing attorneys and their roles, this information remains elusive through public web searches.

Therefore, I must conclude that the specific counsel of record for Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in PGR2026-00045 is not publicly available through the conducted searches.

Counsel of Record for Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in PGR2026-00045 v. Fermat International Inc.:

The counsel of record representing Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in Post-Grant Review (PGR) case PGR2026-00045 against Fermat International Inc. at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) could not be definitively identified through publicly available web search results. The official PTAB docket for this specific case was not directly accessible to extract the appearing counsel information.

While Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) has engaged various law firms for patent litigation and intellectual property matters in other cases, including:

• Robins Kaplan LLP
• Mintz
• Fish & Richardson P.C.
• Daignault Iyer LLP
• Davidson Sheehan LLP

Additionally, Ava Hahn serves as the Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary for Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., overseeing the company's worldwide legal and corporate governance matters. However, it cannot be confirmed from the available information if attorneys from these firms or AMD's in-house legal team are specifically listed as counsel of record for PGR2026-00045.No specific counsel of record representing Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in PGR2026-00045 v. Fermat International Inc. at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) could be definitively identified through the conducted web searches. While the case details (PGR2026-00045, Advanced Micro Devices Inc. as plaintiff, Fermat International Inc. as defendant, and US Patent 11886750 at issue) were confirmed, and the case is pending, the public search results, including PTAB case lists and legal news, did not explicitly name the attorneys who have entered an appearance for Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in this specific PGR proceeding.

Advanced Micro Devices Inc. has historically engaged several law firms for its patent litigation and intellectual property needs, including:

• Robins Kaplan LLP: The firm has served as lead defense counsel for AMD in patent litigation related to graphics processing technology, such as Silicon Graphics, Inc. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., and also represented AMD in the enforcement of its computing and semiconductor patent portfolio against Samsung, reaching a significant settlement.
• Mintz: This firm has represented Advanced Micro Devices in enforcing its patent rights related to novel architectures for GPU circuitry in International Trade Commission (ITC) proceedings.
• Fish & Richardson P.C. and Daignault Iyer LLP: These firms were listed as representing Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. in a district court case, Fermat International, Inc. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (7:26-cv-00011), in the Western District of Texas.
• Davidson Sheehan LLP: Attorneys at this firm, such as Ryan H. Davidson and Adam R. Sheehan, have experience managing AMD's patent portfolio and representing companies like AMD in patent procurement and licensing.

In-house, Ava Hahn is the Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary at Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., where she is responsible for the company's worldwide legal and corporate governance matters, ethics and compliance programs, and public affairs. She joined AMD in 2024, bringing extensive experience from previous general counsel roles at other technology and venture capital firms.

However, without direct access to the PTAB docket for PGR2026-00045, it is not possible to specify which of these firms or individual attorneys are serving as counsel of record for Advanced Micro Devices Inc. in this particular Post-Grant Review.

As of May 29, 2026, the specific counsel of record for Fermat International Inc. in Post-Grant Review (PGR) case PGR2026-00045 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is not yet explicitly identified in publicly available PTAB docket information. The case was filed recently, on May 12, 2026, and is currently in a "Pending" status, meaning an institution decision has not yet been made, and initial responses from the patent owner may still be forthcoming.

However, a related patent infringement lawsuit in district court, Fermat International, Inc. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (7:26-cv-00011, W.D. Texas), filed on January 13, 2026, lists attorneys from Daignault Iyer LLP as representing Fermat International, Inc.. It is common practice for a party to use the same legal team for parallel district court litigation and PTAB proceedings. Therefore, it is highly probable that attorneys from Daignault Iyer LLP will represent Fermat International Inc. in this PGR as well.

Based on the district court filing, the following attorneys from Daignault Iyer LLP have appeared for Fermat International, Inc.:

• Lisa Noelle Phillips (Lead Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results, but Daignault Iyer LLP has offices in Washington D.C., and other locations).
  • Experience Note: Ms. Phillips was granted to practice pro hac vice in the related district court case for Fermat International, Inc..
• Raymond W. Mort, III (Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results).
• Elizabeth Bernard (Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results).
• Scott R. Samay (Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results).
• Taylor G. Lepore (Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results).
• Jason S. Charkow (Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results).
• Stephanie R. Mandir (Counsel)
  • Firm: Daignault Iyer LLP
  • Location: (Specific office location not provided in search results).

For the prosecution of US Patent 11886750, Nixon & Vanderhye P.C. is listed as the agency for Fermat International, Inc.. However, this firm typically handles patent prosecution rather than post-grant review or litigation.