Editing Silicon Graphics (section)

===Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. era===
During Silicon Graphics Inc.'s second bankruptcy phase, it was renamed to Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc.(GPHI) in June 2009.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/091110/Graphics-Properties-Holdings-Inc_8-K/|title=Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. - FORM 8-K - November 10, 2009|access-date=April 17, 2015|archive-date=December 4, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111204135214/http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/091110/Graphics-Properties-Holdings-Inc_8-K/|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=34343|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100717185506/http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=34343|url-status=dead|archive-date=July 17, 2010|title=Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc.: Private Company Information - Businessweek|work=Businessweek.com|access-date=April 17, 2015}}</ref>

In 2010, GPHI announced it had won a significant favorable ruling in its litigation with ATI Technologies and AMD in June 2010,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/11/former-sgi-files-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-apple.html|title=Former SGI Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit against Apple - Patently Apple|access-date=April 17, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/08-1334/08-1334-2011-03-27.pdf|title=United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit SILICON GRAPHICS, INC., Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, v. ATI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ATI TECHNOLOGIES ULC, AND ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., Defendants-Appellants. 2008-1334, -1353 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin in Case No. 06-CV-0611, Chief Judge Barbara B. Crabb|website=justia.com|access-date=March 25, 2018}}</ref> following the patent lawsuit originally filed during the Silicon Graphics, Inc. era.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/sgi-files-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-ati-56597242.html|title=SGI Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against ATI|author=SGI|date=October 23, 2006|access-date=April 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150403124241/http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/sgi-files-patent-infringement-lawsuit-against-ati-56597242.html|archive-date=April 3, 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> Following the 2008 appeal by ATI over the validity of {{US patent|6,650,327}} ('327) and Silicon Graphics Inc's voluntary dismissal of the {{US patent|6,885,376}} ('376) patent from the lawsuit,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.patentlit.com/2008/05/02/silicon-graphics-v-ati-is-a-draw/|title=Welcome patentlit.com - BlueHost.com|access-date=April 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150403134630/http://www.patentlit.com/2008/05/02/silicon-graphics-v-ati-is-a-draw/|archive-date=April 3, 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> the Federal Circuit upheld the jury verdict on the validity of GPHI's U.S. Patent No. 6,650,327, and furthermore found that AMD had lost its right to challenge patent validity in future proceedings.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.itproportal.com/2010/06/09/amd-knocked-back-radeon-patent-spat/|title=AMD knocked back in Radeon patent spat|work=ITProPortal|date=June 9, 2010|access-date=April 17, 2015}}</ref> On January 31, 2011, the District Court entered an order that permits AMD to pursue its invalidity affirmative defense at trial and does not permit SGI to accuse AMD's Radeon R700 series of graphics products of infringement in this case.<ref name="ADVANCED-MICRO-DEVICES-INC-Feb-2011-10-K">{{cite web|url=http://edgar.secdatabase.com/1771/119312511040392/filing-main.htm |title=ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC, Form 10-K, Annual Report, Filing Date Feb 18, 2011 |publisher=secdatabase.com |access-date =May 15, 2018}}</ref> On April 18, 2011, GPHI and AMD had entered into a confidential Settlement and License Agreement that resolved this litigation matter for an immaterial amount and that provides immunity under all GPHI patents for alleged infringement by AMD products, including components, software and designs. On April 26, 2011, the Court entered an order granting the parties' agreed motion for dismissal and final judgment.<ref name="ADVANCED-MICRO-DEVICES-INC-Aug-2011-10-Q">{{cite web|url=http://edgar.secdatabase.com/2640/119312511218202/filing-main.htm |title=ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC, Form 10-Q, Quarterly Report, Filing Date Aug 10, 2011 |publisher=secdatabase.com |access-date =May 15, 2018}}</ref>

In November 2011, GPHI filed another patent infringement lawsuit against Apple Inc. in Delaware involving more patents than their original patent infringement case against Apple last November, for alleged violation of U.S. patents 6,650,327 ('327), {{US patent|6,816,145}} ('145) and {{US patent|5,717,881}} ('881).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2011/11/its-war-former-sgi-surprises-apple-with-another-patent-infringement-lawsuit.html|title=It's War: Former SGI Surprises Apple with another Patent Infringement Lawsuit - Patently Apple|access-date=April 17, 2015}}</ref>

In 2012, GPHI filed lawsuit against Apple, Sony, HTC Corp, LG Electronics Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Research in Motion Ltd. for allegedly violating patent relating to a computer graphics process that turns text and images into pixels to be displayed on screens. Affected devices include Apple iPhone, HTC EVO4G, LG Thrill, Research in Motion Torch, Samsung Galaxy S and Galaxy S II, and Sony Xperia Play smartphones.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/business-technology/apple-rim-get-patent-trolled-by-remnants-of-silicon-graphics/article2383034/print/|title=Apple, RIM get patent trolled by remnants of Silicon Graphics|work=The Globe and Mail|access-date=April 17, 2015|archive-date=March 31, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120331033129/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/business-technology/apple-rim-get-patent-trolled-by-remnants-of-silicon-graphics/article2383034/print/|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/graphicsproperties-patent-lawsuits-idUKL2E8ERKXC20120327|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181203221914/https://uk.reuters.com/article/graphicsproperties-patent-lawsuits-idUKL2E8ERKXC20120327|url-status=dead|archive-date=December 3, 2018|title=UPDATE 2-Apple, Sony, 4 others sued by Graphics Properties|work=Reuters UK|date=March 27, 2012|access-date=April 17, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://morrisjames.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/graphics-properties-holdings-inc-v-samsung-electronics-co-ltd-et-al.pdf|title=Case 1:99-mc-09999 Document 248 GRAPHICS PROPERTIES HOLDINGS, INC., Plaintiff, v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC Defendants.|website=wordpress.com|access-date=March 25, 2018}}</ref>

* {{US patent|6,650,327}} - 1998 Display system having floating point rasterization and floating point ..
* {{US patent|6,885,376}} - 2002 System, method, and computer program product for near-real time load ..
* {{US patent|6,816,145}} - 1998 Large area wide aspect ratio flat panel monitor having high resolution for ..
* {{US patent|5,717,881}} - 1995 Data processing system for processing one and two parcel instructions