Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-02000/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-02000-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 02 MICRO INTERNATIONAL LIMITED,

Defendant. /

No. C-04-02000 CW (EDL)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL

Defendant O2 Micro served requests for production of documents numbers 49-60 and a

deposition notice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) seeking the identities of

customers of Plaintiff MPS who received stock option grants in exchange for assisting MPS in

developing its technology as referenced in MPS’ March 2005 press release. O2 Micro Mot. at 1:18-

20; Declaration of Bijal Vakil Ex. B (press release stating that stock options were granted “primarily

in 2000 through 2002 to individuals who helped in the development of early products of the

Company, and were contingent upon the Company completing an initial public offering.”). O2

Micro seeks to determine whether the stock option grants involve O2 Micro customers or O2 Micro

technology. O2 Micro Reply at 2:24-25. MPS objected to producing this information, so O2 Micro

filed a motion to compel. The Court held a hearing on O2 Micro’s motion on May 30, 2006. At the

hearing, the Court informed the parties that the issue of the relevance of the discovery sought by O2

Micro depended on whether prior litigation had shown that a recipient of a grant of MPS stock

options had misappropriated O2 Micro’s trade secrets. As instructed at the hearing, the parties

submitted additional letter briefs on May 31, 2006 and June 2, 2006 addressing that issue. 

O2 Micro first attempts to show misappropriation of confidential information by employees

at Ambit and Delta to justify discovery. However, there has been no judicial determination that

Case 4:04-cv-02000-CW Document 225 Filed 06/12/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

Ambit or Delta or any of their employees misappropriated O2 Micro’s confidential information. By

contrast, in prior cases involving MPS in this district and in the Eastern District of Texas, both a jury

and a district court judge determined that Sumida, an MPS customer, misappropriated O2 Micro’s

confidential information. O2 Micro also points to testimony by an MPS employee, Mr. Luan, that

MPS had offered stock options to Sumida employees and that one of those employees, Mr. Jaing,

used the proceeds to buy a car. The actual testimony is less clear: “I’m not sure whether, if that is

offer of stock option. All I know is they hold some MPS stock. Possible they purchase themselves. 

I don’t know where they got the stock.” See O2 Micro Ex. 5 at 83:14-17. He also testified that Mr.

Jiang purchased a car using the proceeds of a stock sale, but that he did not know how, when or

where Mr. Jiang obtained the stock, whether it was gifted to Mr. Jiang, or whether Mr. Jiang sold the

stock or not. See O2 Micro Ex. 6 at 120:13-121:16. 

However, MPS concedes that some of the stock options at issue were given to two

individuals who, at least as of 2005, worked for Sumida. MPS June 2, 2006 Letter at 3. Mr. Jiang

was not one of those individuals. Id. MPS has electronically searched its document production and

the names of the two Sumida grantees do not appear on any document that mentions O2 Micro. Id. 

Nevertheless, the grant of options to these Sumida employees indicates a possible

connection between MPS’ grant of stock options and the misappropriation of O2 Micro’s

confidential information. Accordingly, O2 Micro’s motion to compel is granted in part. No later

than June 23, 2006, MPS shall produce to O2 Micro documents sufficient to show the identity of the

individuals from Sumida who received stock options during the relevant time period, along with the

date of the grants, the reasons for the grants including the help given by the recipient in early

product development, the dates the options were exercised, the strike price of the options and the

recorded reason for granting the options. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 12, 2006 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02000-CW Document 225 Filed 06/12/06 Page 2 of 2