台湾 联电告 MU 侵专利权

这篇文章在周一发表，可能就是本二mu股价萎靡不振的原因。双方的争执已经有一年了，官司有结果也要一，二年，消息的影响也就是几天，正像qcom告aapl，要求法院禁止aapl在中国卖手机一样，联电也不会达到目的。目前mu的卖空股有5M，有看空mu的文章也不值得大惊小怪。mu昨天涨3.2%，跟上了本周soxx上涨的步伐。

 

#######################################################################

Problems Continue To Plague Micron Technology - And This Could Be Serious

Jan. 16, 2018 1:36 PM ET

 

(2,332 followers)

Summary

Taiwan foundry UMC filed a countersuit against Micron Technology seeking $42 million in damages as a result of Micron's suit against UMC claiming IP theft.

More importantly, UMC filed an injunction that could prevent Micron Technology from selling DRAM and NAND chips in Mainland China.

Sixty percent of Micron Technology's last fiscal year sales outside the United States went to Mainland China.

United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC), a leading global semiconductor foundry, filed a patent infringement lawsuit on January 12, 2018, against Micron Semiconductor (Xi'an) Co., Ltd. and Micron Semiconductor (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., subsidiaries of Micron Technology (MU) of the U.S.

According to UMC’s Press Release, the lawsuit was filed in the Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and covers three areas that allegedly infringe upon UMC’s patent rights in China, including specific memory applications that relate to DDR4, SSD and memory used in graphics cards.

“UMC has requested the court to order the defendants to stop manufacturing, processing, importing, selling and intending to sell the allegedly infringing products, destroy all inventory and related molds and tools and demand that Micron compensate the company for a total amount of RMB 270 million ($42 million) in damages.”

As background to this issue, I alerted Seeking Alpha readers on April 7, 2017, that Micron was a possible victim of IP theft in a Seeking Alpha article entitled “Micron Technology May Be A Victim Of IP Theft - Should Investors Worry?”

It took eight months for Micron to file a civil lawsuit in California accusing UMC of DRAM trade secret infringement (December 6, 2017). The countersuit by UMC took five weeks.

Problems plaguing Micron Technology

This problem is just a string of incidents facing MU and other memory suppliers in the past four months. I detailed them in a January 11, 2018, Seeking Alpha article entitled “Intel's Split Is Really Bad News For Micron Technology.”

In this article, I noted that with the split in 3D NAND development, Intel (INTC) may form a joint development with China's Tsinghua Unigroup, a company that tried to buy Micron a few years ago.

Neither MU or INTC issued a press release refuting these findings.

What I also find interesting is a January 11, 2018 (same day as my article) statement reported on Seeking Alpha:

·         Needham & Co. defends Micron, saying the Street misunderstood the news that Micron and Intel will stop co-developing NAND chips after the next version.

·         Analyst Rajvindra Gill spoke with Micron CFO Ernie Maddock and says sticking with Intel carried a higher “opportunity cost” than taking on R&D expense to go it alone.

Who are we to believe? Intel’s press release of January 8, 2018, noted:

“The companies have agreed to complete development of their third-generation of 3D NAND technology, which will be delivered toward the end of this year and extending into early 2019. Beyond that technology node, both companies will develop 3D NAND independently in order to better optimize the technology and products for their individual business needs.”

Now we read that Gill spoke with Micron’s CFO, and this was all a misunderstanding, but Micron never issued its own press release! I find that hard to believe.

Even more unbelievable is MU saying nothing when its stock was plummeting on Intel’s press release. On January 8, 2018, the date of the press release, MU’s stock was trading at an inter-day high of $46.07. On January 9, the stock was closed at $43.15 and on January 10 had an inter-day low of $41.98.

This doesn't follow Micron's past response, since the company was quick to refute reports that DRAMeXchange disclosed there was an incident at Micron Technology's Inotera plant that caused the loss of 60,000 DRAM wafers. I detailed this is a July 7, 2017, Seeking Alpha article entitled “Micron May Or May Not Have Had DRAM Production Issues, But It's Creating A Dilemma For Investors.”

Later that same day, Micron Technology issued a statement denying production delays after the incident at the fab. MU reported that it had fully restored the operation of a fabrication factory in Taoyuan from a "minor facility event," and that it expects no material impact on its business.

Investor Takeaway

UMC’s lawsuit against MU’s subsidiaries is the same court that issued an injunction against Veeco (VECO) in a patent dispute with China’s AMEC in early December 2017. AMEC says that in addition to a permanent injunction, it has asked for more than 100 million RMB ($15 million) in damages. Veeco derives 60-70% of its MOCVD revenue from China.

Most importantly for investors, VECO’s stock dropped 19% on December 8, 2017, the day of the court’s decision.

In this current UMC complaint filed with the Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court, UMC asked that the defendants be ordered to stop manufacturing, processing, importing, selling and intending to sell the allegedly infringing products, destroy all inventory and related molds and tools.

Similar to VECO, 60% of MU's sales outside the U.S. went to China. According to MU’s most recent 10K:

“Sales to customers outside the United States totaled $17.56 billion for 2017 and included sales of $10.39 billion in China, $2.54 billion in Taiwan, $1.36 billion in Europe, $1.03 billion in Japan, and $1.81 billion in the rest of the Asia Pacific region. Sales to customers outside the United States totaled $10.47 billion for 2016 and $13.63 billion for 2015.”

If an injunction is granted, it would have a significant impact on Micron’s revenues - and its stock.

Author's note: I have contacted the IR departments at MU and INTC regarding this article for a comment on the litigation as well as to comment on the split between MU and INTC and INTC's ability to work with China's Tsinghua Unigroup. I will alert readers of any response.

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.