Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
| Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | |
|---|---|
 9th Cir. 2002) | |
| Subsequent | Application denied by Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v. Intel Corp., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21437 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 4, 2004) |
| Holding | |
| Section 1782 "authorizes, but does not require, the District Court to provide discovery aid to AMD." | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Ginsburg, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Dissent | Breyer |
| O'Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1782 | |
Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which authorizes United States district courts to enforce discovery requests made in connection with litigation being conducted in foreign tribunals. Prior to Intel, there had been substantial disagreement as to the availability of Section 1782 discovery.
The Intel case originated from
antitrust claims against Intel in Europe. AMD filed a complaint against Intel in the European Union's antitrust enforcement agency (the Directorate-General for Competition
), and then filed a lawsuit in the U.S. for discovery of certain Intel documents in order to further their complaint.
See also
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 542
- List of United States Supreme Court cases
External links
- Text of Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241 (2004) is available from: Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)
PDFs
- Intel's petition on the merits
- AMD's Response brief on the merits
- Intel's reply brief
- The Solicitor General's Amicus brief
- The oral arguments before the Supreme Court