This case was last updated from Santa Clara County Superior Courts on 08/14/2019 at 08:02:32 (UTC).

Credo Semiconductor, Inc., et al. v. Canaan Creative Co., Ltd.

Case Summary

On 08/17/2018 Credo Semiconductor, Inc filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against Canaan Creative Co , Ltd. This case was filed in Santa Clara County Superior Courts, Downtown Superior Court located in Santa Clara, California. The Judge overseeing this case is Kuhnle, Thomas. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ******3569

  • Filing Date:

    08/17/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Santa Clara County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Downtown Superior Court

  • County, State:

    Santa Clara, California

Judge Details

Judge

Kuhnle, Thomas

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

Credo Semiconductor Inc.

Credo Technology (HK) Ltd.

Defendant

Canaan Creative Co., Ltd.

Not Classified By Court

Superior Court of California

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

Han, Edward

White, Kevin

Not Classified By Court Attorney

Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara

 

Court Documents

Dismissal - Entire Action

Dismissal of Entire Action With Prejudice: Comment: Dismissal of Entire Action With Prejudice

Notice

Notice CMC reset from 6-14-19 to 8-2-19: Comment: CMC reset from 6/14/19 to 8/2/19

Notice

Notice CMC reset from 5-31-19 to 6-14-19: Comment: CMC reset from 5/31/19 to 6/14/19

Default Pending

Request for Entry of Default PENDING: Comment: Request for Entry of Default

Declaration

Dec of K White Re Calculation of interest: Comment: Declaration of Kevin White Re Calculation of Interest

Declaration

Dec of M. Gutierrez Re Service of Process: Comment: Declaration of Maria Gutierrez Re Service of Process of Defendant Canaan Creative

Declaration

Dec of K White ISO Req for Deflt Jdgt & ExPApp: Comment: Declaration of Kevin White ISO Request forr Default Judgment and Ex Parte Application

Memorandum: Points and Authorities

Sum of Case ISO Req for Default & Ex Parte App: Comment: Summary of Case & Memo of Points & Authorities ISO Request for Default Judgment

Ex Parte Application

Notice Ex Parte Application Req. for Default HRG 5-10-19: Comment: Notice of Ex Parte Application; Request for Default Judgment

Order

Order Granting Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Serve Complaint: Comment: Order Granting Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Serve Complaint - signed/TEK

Declaration

HRG 10-12-18 Dec Kevin White ISO Ex Parte.pdf: Comment: HRG 10-12-18 Declaration of Kevin White ISO Ex Parte

Memorandum: Points and Authorities

Memorandum Points and Authorities: Comment: HRG 10-12-18 Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Ex Parte Application

Ex Parte Application: Comment: HRG 10-12-18 Ex Parte Application to Extend Time

Order: Deeming Case Complex

Order Deeming Case Complex and Staying Discovery and Responsive Pleading Deadline: Comment: Order Deeming Case Complex and Staying Discovery and Responsive Pleading Deadline signed/TEK

Civil Lawsuit Notice

Credo-Canaan - Civil Lawsuit Notice 2018-08-27.pdf: Comment: 1st CMC set for 11/30/18 at 10am in D5; assigned to Hon. Thomas E. Kuhnle

Summons: Issued/Filed

Credo-Canaan - Summons 2018-08-17.pdf:

Civil Case Cover Sheet

Credo-Canaan - Civil Cover Sheet 2018-08-17.pdf:

Complaint (Unlimited) (Fee Applies)

Complaint (Unlimited) (Fee Applies):

9 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 08/02/2019
  • Conference: Case Management - Judicial Officer: Kuhnle, Thomas; Hearing Time: 10:00 AM; Cancel Reason: Vacated; Comment: (1st CMC) Discovery and responsive pleading deadline stayed, as of 8/29/18, when the case was deemed complex. Time to serve complaint has been extended to 5/12/19.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Dismissal - Entire Action - Dismissal of Entire Action With Prejudice: Comment: Dismissal of Entire Action With Prejudice

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Notice - Notice CMC reset from 6-14-19 to 8-2-19: Comment: CMC reset from 6/14/19 to 8/2/19

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/29/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Notice - Notice CMC reset from 5-31-19 to 6-14-19: Comment: CMC reset from 5/31/19 to 6/14/19

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/10/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Hearing: Exparte Application - Notice Ex Parte Application Req. for Default HRG 5-10-19: Sum of Case ISO Req for Default & Ex Parte App: Dec of K White ISO Req for Deflt Jdgt & ExPApp: Dec of M. Gutierrez Re Service of Process: Dec of K White Re Calculation of interest: Request for Entry of Default PENDING: Request for Court Judgment: Partial Request for Dismissal: Judicial Officer: Kuhnle, Thomas; Hearing Time: 2:00 PM; Cancel Reason: Vacated; Comment: Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application (Request for Default Judgment)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Dismissal - Partial Request for Dismissal: Comment: Dismissal Without Prejudice of the Cross-Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Default Pending - Request for Court Judgment: Comment: Request for Court Judgment

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Default Pending - Request for Entry of Default PENDING: Comment: Request for Entry of Default

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Declaration - Dec of K White Re Calculation of interest: Comment: Declaration of Kevin White Re Calculation of Interest

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2019
  • View Court Documents
  • Declaration - Dec of M. Gutierrez Re Service of Process: Comment: Declaration of Maria Gutierrez Re Service of Process of Defendant Canaan Creative

    Read MoreRead Less
5 More Docket Entries
  • 10/12/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Hearing: Exparte Application - Ex Parte Application: Memorandum Points and Authorities: HRG 10-12-18 Dec Kevin White ISO Ex Parte.pdf: Order Granting Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Serve Complaint: Judicial Officer: Kuhnle, Thomas; Hearing Time: 3:00 PM; Cancel Reason: Vacated; Comment: Ex Parte Application by Plaintiffs for Extension of Time to Serve Defendants

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/10/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Order - Order Granting Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Serve Complaint: Comment: Order Granting Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Serve Complaint - signed/TEK

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Declaration - HRG 10-12-18 Dec Kevin White ISO Ex Parte.pdf: Comment: HRG 10-12-18 Declaration of Kevin White ISO Ex Parte

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Memorandum: Points and Authorities - Memorandum Points and Authorities: Comment: HRG 10-12-18 Memorandum of Points & Authorities

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Ex Parte Application - Ex Parte Application: Comment: HRG 10-12-18 Ex Parte Application to Extend Time

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/29/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Order: Deeming Case Complex - Order Deeming Case Complex and Staying Discovery and Responsive Pleading Deadline: Comment: Order Deeming Case Complex and Staying Discovery and Responsive Pleading Deadline signed/TEK

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Civil Lawsuit Notice - Credo-Canaan - Civil Lawsuit Notice 2018-08-27.pdf: Comment: 1st CMC set for 11/30/18 at 10am in D5; assigned to Hon. Thomas E. Kuhnle

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Summons: Issued/Filed - Credo-Canaan - Summons 2018-08-17.pdf:

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet - Credo-Canaan - Civil Cover Sheet 2018-08-17.pdf:

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2018
  • View Court Documents
  • Complaint (Unlimited) (Fee Applies) - Complaint (Unlimited) (Fee Applies):

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

page 0 can't be parsed

Plaintiffs Credo Semiconductor Inc. (“Credo Semiconductor”) and Credo Technology (HK)) Ltd. (“Credo Technology” and, together with Credo Semiconductor, “Credo”) hereby complain against defendants Canaan Creative Co., Ltd. (“Canaan”) and Does 1 through 10 (collectively, “Defendants™), upon personal knowledge as to themselves and their own acts and upon information and belief as to all other matters, as follows: |

L INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action to recover unpaid fees owed by Defendant Canaan to Credo pursuant to a license agreement for Credo’s proprietary technology. Canaan has been informed of its failure to pay the fees, which are now due and owing, and, indeed, it has admitted its confractual duty to render payment of the fees. Instead of paying the fees owed, however, Canaan continues to unjustifiably withhold payment in breach of its contractual obligations.

II. PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Credo Semiconductor is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of California, with a principal place of business at 1900 McCarthy Boulevard, Suite 420, Milpitas, California.

3. Plaintiff Credo Technology is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Hong Kong, with a principal place of business at 5 Science Park West Avenue, Suite 221, 2/F, Core Building 2, Phase 1, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, N.T., Hong Kong.

4, Credo Semiconductor and Credo Technology are affiliated corporate entities.

5. Defendant Canaan is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the People’s Republic of China, with a principal place of business at Zhongguancun Software Park (ZPARK), No. 23, Suite 307, Haidian District, Beijing, China.

6. Defendants Does 1 through 10 are as yet unknown companies, entities, and/or individuals who are affiliated or associated with Canaan and who are legally responsible for Credo’s losses. The true names or capacities, whether individual, corporate or otherwise, of Does 1 through 10 are unknown to Credo at the present time, and these defendants are therefore sued by such fictitious names. Credo will amend this Complaint to show their true names andpage 2 can't be parsed

agreed to pay Credo certain fixed fees on dates coinciding with certain milestones in Canaan’s development of the Product.

14. In Section 5.1 of the SOW, Canaan and Credo specifically agreed that Canaan “shall develop” the Product in accordance with a schedule set forth in the body of the SOW (the “Development Schedule™). This Development Schedule contained several “Development Plan Milestones™ and promised “Complefion Date[s]”.

15. In Section 5.2 of the SOW, Canaan and Credo further agreed that Canaan “shall pay Credo license fees” and “NRE][s]” (Non-Recurring Engineering costs) in certain fixed amounts on dates coinciding with Canaan’s completion of the Development Plan Milestones (the “Payment Schedule™).

16. The Development Schedule listed three Development Plan Milestones:

(1) “Execution of SOW by the Parties,” with a promised completion date of June 2017, (2) “Product Tape-Out,” with a promised completion date of December 2017; and

(3) “Verification Functional for SerDes”—a part of Credo’s Licensed Technology—“in the

Product,” with a promised completion date of June 2018. The Payment Schedule, in turn, listed three sets of fees: (1) license and NRE fees of $700,000.00 and $200,000.00, respectively, upon “Execution of SOW by Parties”; (2) license and NRE fees of $1,000,000.00 émd $300,000.00, respectively, upon “Product Tape-Out”; and (3) a license fee of $800,000.00 upon “Verification Functional for SerDes in the Product.”

17. Thus, through the License Agreement, Canaan promised to “develop” the Product and to pay Credo fixed license and NRE fees the timing of which would be based on milestones in that development. In the License Agreement’s recitals, Canaan specifically stated that it “ha[d] the expertise and resources to incorporate Credo’s technology with other technology to create a significant value-added product and to market, distribute and support this value added product.”

18. The License Agreement had an initial term of three years, commencing on June 30, 2017, and it provided that thereafter the term “shall automatically extend for additional one (1) year terms until terminated in accordance with . . . Section 8” of the License Agreement. the right to charge a lateone-half percent (1.5%) per month, compounding monthly . . . on any balance remaining unpaid for more than thirty (30) days from the payment

due date . .. .”

B. Credo’s Performance Under the License Agreement and Canaan’s Payment of the First Set of License and NRE Fees

20. Inaccordance with Credo’s obligations under the License Agreement, beginning in

June 2017, Credo granted Canaan a license to its proprietary technology and provided Canaan

with related documents and IP deliverables.

21. Canaan then paid Credo the first set of license and NRE fees, totaling $900,000.00.

C. Canaan’s Unjustified Failure to Pay Credo Any Additional License and NRE Fees, In Violation of Its Obligations Under the License Agrecment

22. Beginning in or around December 2017, however, Canaan failed to pay Credo any of the remaining license and NRE fees that the License Agreement required. 23, Specifically, in December 2017, Canaan failed to pay Credo the $1,000,000.00

license fee and $300,000.00 NRE fee that Canaan had promised to pay upon completion of the

“Product Tape-Out” milestone which Canaan had promised to complete by December 2017 (the “December 2017 Fees”). 24. Canaan’s failure make the foregoing payments was inconsistent with Canaan’s

promises to Credo under the License Agreement.

D. Canaan’s Acknowledgment of Its Obligation To Pay Under the License Agreement :

25. Credo reached out on numerous occasions to try to obtain payment. Credo also

requested meetings with Canaan to discuss the outstanding payment. Canaan, however, essentially ignored Credo’s outreach.page 5 can't be parsed

page 6 can't be parsed

paragraphs, including the benefits of a license to certain of Credo’s proprietary technology, related documents and computer hardware and/or software, and related maintenance services furnished by Credo to Canaan.

44, In furnishing the aforementioned license, documents, software and/or hardware, and maintenance services, Credo was not acting as a volunteer, and Canaan accepted the benefits of that which Credo had furnished without paying for those benefits.

45. Asaresult of Canaan’s wrongful acts or omissions, Canaan has been unjustly enriched and, therefore, it would be inequitable for Canaan to be allowed to retain the benefits of Credo’s services and Canaan’s use of Credo’s proprietary technology without being ordered to pay the reasonable value for such technology and services.

46. Accordingly, Credo 1s entitled to restitution in an amount to be determined at trial.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Quantum Meruit) (Against All Defendants)

47. Credo repeats and realleges the allegations of the above paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

48. Credo provided Canaan the benefits and services described in the foregoing paragraphs, including the license to certain of Credo’s proprietary technology, related documents

and computer hardware and/or software, and related maintenance services, at the request of and

on behalf of Canaan.

49. Canaan received and enjoyed the benefit of the aforementioned technology and services.

50. Canaan has failed to pay Credo the reasonable value of the aforementioned

technology and services. 51. Credo is entitled to receive the reasonable value of such technology and services in an amount to be determined at trial.

/1!

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Credo prays that the Court enter judgment against Defendant Canaan as follows: A. For compensatory damages according to proof;

For late fees on any unpaid amounts, according to proof;

For pre- and post-judgment interest; For restitution from Canaan according to proof;

For costs of suit herein according to law; and

s ® U 0w

For such other and further relief that this Court deems just and proper.

DATED: August 17,2018 PAUL HASTINGS LLP

By: ( JM#»

EDWARD H

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Credo Semiconductor Inc. and Credo Technology (HK) Ltd.