EMC 2002 Annual Report Download - page 13

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 13 of the 2002 EMC annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 118

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118

Table of Contents
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In April 2002, EMC filed a complaint against Hitachi, Ltd. and Hitachi Data Systems Corporation (together, "Hitachi") with the International Trade
Commission ("ITC") and in the United States Federal District Court in Worcester, Massachusetts. The ITC complaint alleged that Hitachi engaged in
unlawful activities by importing into the United States products that infringed six EMC patents. We asked the ITC to issue an injunction to block importation
of Hitachi's infringing products and in May 2002, the ITC voted to commence an investigation into our claims. The suit in District Court seeks preliminary
and permanent injunctions as well as unspecified monetary damages for patent infringement. In June 2002, the suit in District Court was stayed, pending the
outcome of the ITC action. Subsequent to the date we filed a complaint against Hitachi, in April 2002, Hitachi and Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
("HICAM") filed a complaint against us in the United States Federal District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma alleging that certain of our products
infringe eight Hitachi patents and seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions as well as unspecified monetary damages for patent infringement. In July
2002, this suit was transferred to the United States Federal District Court in Worcester, Massachusetts. In March 2003, EMC and Hitachi jointly announced
that the parties had entered into agreements whereby they agreed (i) to settle all pending patent infringement claims between EMC, Hitachi and HICAM, (ii)
to cross-license their respective patents and (iii) to a framework for exchanging technology in the form of storage-related APIs. In accordance with the cross-
license agreements, we will receive payments from Hitachi. The cross-license agreements expire at the end of 2007. On February 27, 2003, EMC and Hitachi
filed a Joint Motion with the ITC to terminate the ITC investigation on the basis of the above-referenced agreements, and on March 11, 2003, the ITC judge
signed an order terminating the ITC investigation. The parties intend to move to dismiss the district court actions referenced above once the ITC judge's order
has been accepted by the ITC.
On September 30, 2002, EMC filed a complaint against Hewlett-Packard Company ("HP") in the United States Federal District Court in Worcester,
Massachusetts alleging that certain HP products infringe six EMC patents. The suit seeks a permanent injunction as well as unspecified monetary damages for
patent infringement. On September 30, 2002, HP filed a complaint against us in the United States Federal District Court for the Northern District of California
alleging that certain of our products infringe seven HP patents. The suit seeks a permanent injunction as well as unspecified monetary damages for patent
infringement. We believe that HP's claims are without merit, and on October 1, 2002, we filed an amended complaint asking the court to declare that the
seven HP patents are invalid and not infringed.
We are a party to other litigation which we consider routine and incidental to our business. Management does not expect the results of any of these
actions to have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No matter was submitted to a vote of our stockholders during the fourth quarter of 2002.
10