Intel responds to AMD antitrust suit
{{date|September  2, 2005}}
[[File:Intel logo (1968-2006).svg|right|90px]]
[[File:AMD Logo (pre-2013).svg|right|90px]]
<div style="Text-align: justify">
{{w|Intel}} has filed its response to {{w|Advanced Micro Devices|AMD's}} {{w|antitrust}} lawsuit of June 27, 2005, saying AMD's claims are "factually incorrect and contradictory".  The 63-page response, filed in federal district court in Delaware, is 15 pages longer than the original lawsuit.  The strongly worded reply from Intel prompted many industry watchers to comment that the legal battle could take years to settle.  According to Intel, "the evidence will show that every failure and setback for which A.M.D. today seeks to blame Intel is actually a direct result of A.M.D.'s own actions or inactions."

AMD has already issued its own rebutta. On September 29, a federal multi-district court in [[North Carolina]] will decide whether or not to combine many class-action suits related to the same charges.
</div>
==Related news==
*{{wikinews|title=AMD files antitrust lawsuit against Intel in US federal district court|date=June 29, 2005}}
*{{wikinews|title=Intel's offices across the EU raided|date=July 12, 2005}}

== Sources ==
*{{source|url=http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/02/1148254
|title=Intel Replies to AMD Antitrust Lawsuits
|author=
|pub=Slashdot
|date=September 02, 2005}}
*{{source|url=http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2005/08/29/daily46.html
|title=Intel: AMD's antitrust claims are false
|author=
|pub=Austin Business Journal
|date=September 02, 2005}}
*{{source|url=http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2005-09-01T213420Z_01_MCC176468_RTRIDST_0_TECH-INTEL-AMD-DC.XML
|title=Intel files response to AMD antitrust charges
|author=Daniel Sorid and Eric Auchard
|pub=Reuters
|date=September 02, 2005}}
*{{source|url=http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/77062/intel-and-amd-fight-escalates.html
|title=Intel and AMD fight escalates
|author=Alun Williams
|pub=PCPro
|date=September 02, 2005}}
*{{source|url=http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/12542193.htm
|title=Intel blasts AMD: You goofed, so don't go and blame it on us
|author=Dean Takahashi
|pub=Mercury News
|date=September 02, 2005}}
*{{source|url=http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-intel2sep02,1,6767471.story?coll=la-headlines-business
|title=Intel to AMD: It's Your Own Fault You're an Also-Ran
|author=Terril Yue Jones
|pub=Los Angeles Times
|date=September 02, 2005}}
*{{source|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/02/technology/02chip.html
|title=Intel Sharply Rebuts A.M.D.'s Antitrust Suit
|author=Laurie J. Flynn
|pub=New York Times
|date=September 02, 2005}}

{{publish}}

{{PD-Article}}

{{archive}}
[[Category:Computing]]
[[Category:Science and technology]]
[[Category:United States]]
[[Category:Delaware]]
[[Category:Antitrust]]
[[Category:Crime and law]]
[[Category:Intel]]
[[Category:Economy and business]]
90px
90px

Advanced Micro Devices|AMD's  lawsuit of June 27, 2005, saying AMD's claims are "factually incorrect and contradictory".  The 63-page response, filed in federal district court in Delaware, is 15 pages longer than the original lawsuit.  The strongly worded reply from Intel prompted many industry watchers to comment that the legal battle could take years to settle.  According to Intel, "the evidence will show that every failure and setback for which A.M.D. today seeks to blame Intel is actually a direct result of A.M.D.'s own actions or inactions."

AMD has already issued its own rebutta. On September 29, a federal multi-district court in North Carolina will decide whether or not to combine many class-action suits related to the same charges.
Computing Science and technology United States Delaware Antitrust Crime and law Intel Economy and business