Joint Statement – Agreement Resolving Litigation
The following is a joint statement from Cisco and Arista regarding the existing litigation.
The following is a joint statement from Cisco and Arista regarding the existing litigation.
The International Trade Commission yesterday sent a strong message to Arista that its “corporate culture of copying”, as the ITC has put it, must stop. By rejecting Arista’s efforts to delay orders that Arista stop importing and selling infringing
We learned this morning that the U.S. Trade Representative and the White House have rejected Arista’s “trade policy” pleas, and refused to stop the ITC’s limited exclusion and cease and desist orders from going into effect. The orders were issued in
We received word today that an ITC judge has issued a decision that Arista’s redesigned products do not continue to use the Cisco “SysDB” patented technology, which Arista was found to have infringed in the ITC’s “944 Investigation”. The judge’s
With the second International Trade Commission (ITC) trial regarding Arista’s use of Cisco’s proprietary networking technology patents almost complete, now is a good time to provide an update. As you will recall, Cisco filed copyright and patent
We’ve promised to provide regular updates about important events related to our litigation to stop Arista’s wrongful copying of Cisco’s copyrighted and patented intellectual property. An action by the Supreme Court of the United States this week has
Today Arista moved to formally delay the target date for completion of the ITC case by six months. These cases involve the pervasive copying of Cisco's intellectual property and these cases should progress quickly and we will oppose any delay.
Today, we have formally asked the US International Trade Commission for an injunction (in ITC parlance, an “exclusion order”) blocking Arista from importing and selling products that use Cisco’s patented technologies in the United States.
In the thirteen years I’ve been General Counsel of Cisco, I can count on one hand the number of times we’ve initiated suit against a competitor, supplier or customer. It’s therefore only after thoughtful and serious consideration that we are today