As part of an agreement between the two companies on the structure of the proceedings, the trial is to be a "bench trial," meaning that there will be no jury. Judge Maxine Chesney will preside over the case and decide the outcome.

Judge Chesney has instructed Synopsys and Magma that they will each have a total of 12 hours to present their cases, not including opening and closing arguments, according to David Stanley, Magma senior vice president of corporate affairs. The 12 hour time limit includes both direct testimony and cross-examination, Stanley said.

The trial is set to proceed for five hours per day Monday through Thursday of next week, then resume the following Monday, April 30. Because Judge Chesney has a scheduling conflict May 4, and because of her imposed time limit, it is likely that the trail will conclude by May 3.

Unlike a jury trial, where a verdict is handed down immediately thereafter, there is no timetable for Judge Chesney to reach a decision on the legal ownership of the technology in question, according to Stanley. It is possible that she may issue a ruling immediately following the trial, he said, but it is also possible that a ruling would not come for weeks or even months after the trial concludes.

Even after Judge Chesney issues a decision on the legal ownership of the technology contained in the disputed patents, the matter will not be completely resolved, according to a Yvette Huygen, senior manager of worldwide public relations for Synopsys. The trial is entering the first phase of what Synopsys believes will be two portions, Huygen said, with the second phase to commence at a future time to examine the question of patent infringement once the legal ownership of the patents has been settled.

Because Synopsys initiated the suit, it will present its case first. Both sides will be allowed to cross-examine witnesses who testify on behalf of one of the companies.

According to sources familiar with patent litigation, it is rare that a high-profile patent dispute case actually goes to trial. Typically, parties involved settle out of court for various reasons, often financial.

But, pointing to the current trial in the patent infringement suit brought by Rambus Inc. against Hynix Semiconductor Inc. and other cases, Stanley said it is becoming more common.

"I think there's a change in sentiment to some extent," Stanley said. "People believe that more cases should go to trial, rather than settle."

Synopsys (Mountain View, Calif.) and Magma (Santa Clara, Calif.) have been locked in a contentious patent dispute since September 2004. Synopsys originally sued Magma for patent infringement, claiming that Magma's former chief scientist timing closure methodology originally developed while employed by Synopsys in Magma's Blast Fusion IC physical design suite. Magma disputes this claim.