Adeia Sues AMD Over Semiconductor Patent Infringement

Background of the Dispute

Adeia Inc. has initiated two patent infringement lawsuits against Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The suits allege that AMD’s processors infringe upon ten of Adeia’s patents related to semiconductor packaging and manufacturing technologies. Seven of the patents involve hybrid bonding — a method for vertically integrating chips — while the remaining three address advanced process node innovations used in modern logic and memory fabrication.

According to Adeia, the legal action follows several years of unsuccessful licensing discussions with AMD. The company contends that AMD’s products, including its 3D V-Cache processors, rely heavily on Adeia’s patented interconnect and bonding technologies.

The Patented Technology

Hybrid bonding represents a crucial advancement in chip design, enabling direct copper-to-copper and dielectric-to-dielectric interfaces between stacked dies. This approach eliminates the need for traditional solder bumps, resulting in denser, thermally efficient connections that improve data throughput and power efficiency.

AMD’s 3D V-Cache architecture — the core technology behind its Ryzen X3D series — exemplifies this technique. The design stacks a 64MB slab of SRAM atop each compute die, leveraging hybrid bonding to deliver performance gains without exceeding thermal limits. The process is widely understood to utilize Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company’s (TSMC) SoIC technology, a proprietary variant of hybrid bonding used in ultra-dense 3D integration.

Adeia, previously part of Xperi Holding Corporation before becoming an independent entity in 2022, claims ownership of an extensive intellectual property portfolio covering these interconnect technologies. Its proprietary DBI and ZiBond systems are licensed across multiple semiconductor sectors, including CMOS image sensors and 3D NAND flash memory. The company argues that AMD’s use of hybrid bonding mirrors these innovations, providing AMD with a competitive edge in both gaming and enterprise markets.

Adeia’s Position

In its filings, Adeia asserts that AMD’s ongoing use of its patented technology has “greatly contributed to their success as a market leader.” Adeia CEO Paul Davis stated that the company remains open to “a fair and reasonable arrangement that reflects the value of our intellectual property.”

The lawsuits seek damages and injunctive relief, though such injunctions are rarely granted under current patent law standards established by eBay Inc. v. MercExchange. Adeia maintains that it would prefer to resolve the dispute through a licensing agreement but is prepared to defend its patents in court if necessary.

AMD’s Potential Defense

AMD has not yet issued a public response to the litigation. However, industry analysts anticipate that the company will challenge Adeia’s claims through the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inter partes review process. AMD is expected to argue that the asserted patents are overly broad or preempted by TSMC’s existing process IP, since AMD designs its chips but relies on TSMC for manufacturing.

The semiconductor industry often faces overlapping intellectual property claims as companies pursue innovations in semiconductor materials and packaging. The complexity of hybrid bonding patents — which can involve both design and manufacturing layers — may make this case a significant test of where the boundaries of ownership lie between design firms and foundries.

Role of Expert Witnesses

Given the technical nature of Adeia’s claims, the case will likely require expert testimony from specialists in semiconductor process engineering, materials science, and electrical engineering. These experts can explain how hybrid bonding operates at the atomic and interconnect levels, clarify distinctions between process IP and design IP, and assess whether AMD’s implementation directly overlaps with Adeia’s patented methods. Their analysis will be essential in helping the court understand the nuances of chip stacking, packaging, and interconnect design.

Broader Implications for the Semiconductor Industry

The outcome of Adeia’s suits could have wider implications for how intellectual property rights are allocated in vertically integrated semiconductor designs. Hybrid bonding is seen as a foundation for future chip scaling, especially as transistor miniaturization approaches physical limits. Performance improvements in upcoming architectures are expected to depend more on stacking efficiency than on node shrinkage.

AMD’s product roadmap, including its EPYC server processors and future accelerators, leans heavily on 3D-stacked components that blend compute, memory, and I/O layers. A ruling that restricts or monetizes these hybrid bonding implementations could influence AMD’s cost structure and licensing strategy moving forward.

Legal experts note that early procedural outcomes — including any motion to dismiss or summary judgment challenges — could determine whether the case proceeds to trial or resolves through settlement.

What’s Next

Both lawsuits were filed in the Western District of Texas, a jurisdiction known for its active patent docket and technically sophisticated judiciary. If the cases advance past preliminary motions, the court’s findings could help define the scope of hybrid bonding patents across the semiconductor industry.

For now, the litigation poses no immediate risk to AMD’s production or distribution, but a protracted legal battle could introduce uncertainty into its licensing negotiations and future technology partnerships.