Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int'l, Inc.

PATENTS: PERMANENT INJUNCTION: The detrimental effect of restricting innovation combined with the public’s general interest in protecting inventive technology property outweighs any public interest in purchasing cheaper products from an infringing party.

Opinion (Stark): Power Integrations, Inc. (“Power”) seeks a permanent injunction from the Court to prevent Fairchild Semiconductor, Inc. (“Fairchild”) from infringing on its patents. Fairchild competed with Power on “design-win” contracts, which customarily resulted in long-term business to design supplier and third-party products. Fairchild directly infringed on several of Power’s patents-in-suit. To obtain a permanent injunction, the moving party must show: (1) that it has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are inadequate to compensate for that injury; (3) that, considering the balance of hardships between Power and Fairchild, a remedy in equity is warranted; and (4) that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction. Power demonstrated that it was irreparably harmed by Fairchild’s infringement and will continue to be irreparably harmed without a permanent injunction. The Court holds that Power will be irreparably harmed by having to compete with Fairchild on “design-win” contracts using technology that directly infringed on its patents-in-suit, and the detrimental effect of restricting innovation combined with the public’s general interest in protecting inventive technology property outweighed any public interest in purchasing cheaper products from an infringing party. GRANTED.