& cplSiteName &

Cisco Hits Setback in Arista Suit

Mitch Wagner
7/16/2015

A judge has dismissed two parts of Cisco's patent infringement lawsuit against Arista, but is letting the rest of the case move forward.

Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO) hit Arista Networks Inc. in December with massive patent and copyright lawsuits charging "repeated and pervasive copying of key inventions in Cisco products." The infringing features include Cisco's implementation of the generic command line interface (CLI), Cisco alleges. (See Cisco Slams Arista With Massive Patent & Copyright Suit.)

In a July 9 decision, Judge Beth Labson Freeman, for the US District Court in San Jose, granted Arista's motion to dismiss Cisco allegations of indirect patent infringement prior to the lawsuit, because Cisco is not seeking damages for the allegations prior to the suit.

Separately, Freeman upheld a motion by Arista to dismiss a claim by Cisco that Arista willfully infringed Cisco's patents after Cisco filed its lawsuit.

In that claim, Cisco charged that Arista's EOS+ software, released in December, after the lawsuit was filed, continued patent violations alleged in the lawsuit. Cisco claims that Arista's own press release shows "plausibly that Arista brought a new product to market despite having been put on notice of its infringing conduct by virtue of" Cisco's lawsuit, according to Freeman's decision. (See Arista Gets With the Programmability Program.)

But Arista said EOS+ isn't a new product but instead is a "new version of an existing product," Freeman says (emphasis hers). The judge dismisses Arista's statement in its press release as "puffery."

Cisco proposed a "bright line" test "to determine when a party could seek damages for willful infringement" that goes beyond just "continuing to sell existing accused products while defending the suit," Freeman said

But Freeman decided that the test is unnecessary, because Cisco "failed to allege sufficient facts to meet its own 'bright line' test," and existing precedent covers the allegations. "Especially in regard to software products where updates and revisions are commonplace and frequent in a rapidly evolving market, one could expect that during the course of litigation most software products would have to be revised or die," Freeman says.

Freeman left the door open for Cisco to amend its pleadings.


Find out more about key developments related to the systems and technologies deployed in data centers on Light Reading's data center infrastructure Channel


Freeman's order giving Cisco the opportunity to amend its complaint is "exactly what we expected," Cisco general counsel Mark Chandler said in a statement emailed to Light Reading by a Cisco spokesman.

The decision leaves Arista "in the strange position" of arguing that its own claims about EOS were just "puffery," Chandler said.

Chandler added, "They introduced EOS+ even after they knew of our allegations that they had used our patented technologies, so there can be no doubt that their action was willful. Their motion against the willfulness allegation doesn't rest on denial of infringement, but rather suggest that EOS+ is just a minor tweak to their earlier infringing product. Having owned up to that, maybe they will decide to step forward and admit their patent infringement. The patent infringement claims are unaffected by the judge's order."

Next page: War of words

(2)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Mitch Wagner
Mitch Wagner
7/17/2015 | 10:48:27 AM
Re: Who Knows?
Cisco wins even if it loses, if it can manage to spread FUD about Arista. 

I don't mean that as a criticism of Cisco -- not at all. Spreading FUD about the competition is a perfectly legitimate business and marketing technique, much as the competition and industry observers like to shriek and clutch their pearls about it. 
kq4ym
kq4ym
7/17/2015 | 8:50:33 AM
Who Knows?
This may be another case of the only winners may be the attorneys. One wonders why companies can't settle their differences out of court, but of course that would not please attorneys billing by the hour. We of course don't know who's right or wrong or indeed even if there is a party acting improperly at this stage of the game, but it looks like an expensive legal year (or years) ahead for both parties in this fight.
Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 1-2, 2019, New Orleans, Louisiana
October 10, 2019, New York, New York
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events
Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
Edge Computing, the Next Great IT Revolution
By Rajesh Gadiyar, Vice President & CTO, Network & Custom Logic Group, Intel Corp
Innovations in Home Media Terminals for the Upcoming 5G Era
By Tang Wei, Vice President, ZTE Corporation
All Partner Perspectives