National Instruments vs. MathWorks Patent Infringement Case
This paper examines the patent infringement lawsuit filed by National Instruments against The MathWorks over alleged violations of intellectual property embedded in the LabVIEW software product. The case centered on "data flow diagram" technology used in programming design tools, with National Instruments claiming that MathWorks's SimuLink product infringed on four of its patents. The paper traces the progression of the case from its 2000 filing in a U.S. District Court in Texas through a 2003 jury verdict, a post-trial injunction, multiple appeals, and a final resolution by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit in 2006.
- Background and Origins of the Dispute: NI's IP strategy and the basis of the lawsuit
- The 2003 Trial and Jury Verdict: Jury findings on four patents and damages awarded
- Post-Trial Hearing and Injunction: Judge upholds ruling and issues sales injunction
- MathWorks's Appeal and Arguments: Grounds for appeal and arguments against infringement
- Resolution and Final Ruling: Federal Circuit affirms violations and closes case
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Follows a clear chronological structure that makes a complex multi-stage legal case easy to follow.
- Identifies and explains the central technical dispute — the definition and ownership of "data flow diagram" technology — giving the legal arguments concrete grounding.
- Captures both sides of the dispute fairly, summarizing MathWorks's defense and appeal arguments alongside National Instruments's claims.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates case-study narration applied to intellectual property law: it tracks a legal proceeding through multiple procedural stages (filing, trial, post-trial hearing, appeal, final ruling) and explains at each stage what arguments were raised and what the outcome was. This approach allows the reader to understand not just the verdict but the reasoning and procedural mechanisms that shaped it.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with background on National Instruments and its IP strategy before describing the filing and technical heart of the case. It then covers the two-week trial and jury verdict, the post-trial injunction hearing, MathWorks's grounds for appeal (including definitional disputes and the scope of the injunction), and finally the rejection of the appeal and the 2006 Federal Circuit decision that closed the case.
Background and Origins of the Dispute
Throughout the 1990s, National Instruments worked aggressively to defend its intellectual property. The firm believed that in 1990 it had developed revolutionary new techniques for programming design. Its product, LabVIEW, had been a strong performer in the market but had run into increasing competition. Most of the times that National Instruments filed suit, the matter was settled out of court. The first time a case reached trial was the suit filed against The MathWorks over its product SimuLink.
The case of National Instruments vs. MathWorks pertains to patent violations involving National Instruments's proprietary software. National Instruments contended that intellectual property pertaining to its LabVIEW product was violated by MathWorks in its SimuLink product. These patents related to certain innovations in programming design tools. At the heart of the case were "data flow diagrams" used to create model systems. One of the central problems in the case pertained to the specific definition of "data flow diagram," a point that was later raised by MathWorks when the case went to appeal.
Works Cited
No author. (n.d.). MathWorks vs. National Instruments Patent Case is Same O, Same O. Embedded Star. Retrieved March 6, 2009 from http://www.embeddedstar.com/press/content/2003/6/embedded9365.html
Schreier, Paul. (2003). Jury Finds in Favor of National Instruments in Patent Infringement Lawsuit against the MathWorks. Chip Center. Retrieved March 6, 2009 from http://archive.chipcenter.com/dsp/DSP030207F1.html
No author. (2004). Court Enforces NI's patent infringement case against the MathWorks. Austin Business Journal. Retrieved March 6, 2009 from http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2004/10/11/daily35.html
Crouch, Dennis. (2004). Federal Circuit: National Instruments vs. MathWorks. Patently-O. Retrieved March 6, 2009 from http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2004/09/federal_circuit.html
Sperling, Ed. (2003). The MathWorks Found Guilty of Patent Infringement. Electronic News. Retrieved March 6, 2009 from
No author. (2004). Court of Appeals Upholds Patent Infringement Judgment against the MathWorks, Inc. Business Wire. Retrieved March 6, 2009 from
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
7-Day Pass
Does not renew
Get 7-Day PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.