Hamidi believed that the chip maker mistreated its staff and sent a series of e-mail messages to 65,000 Intel.com addresses. The company took action, seeking a court action to stop him doing it again.
The Appeals Court ruled that sending unwanted e-mail was an illegal trespass. However, Judge Daniel Kolkey dissented from the majority and wrote:
"Under Intel's theory, even lovers' quarrels could turn into trespass suits by reason of the receipt of unsolicited letters or calls from the jilted lover. Imagine what happens after the angry lover tells her fiancée not to call again and violently hangs up the phone. Fifteen minutes later the phone rings. Her fiancée wishing to make up? No, tresspass to chattel."
The majority reasoned that Intel’s injury was the time lost by its employees while they read the e-mails. Judge Kolkey said that this was insufficient injury to support a claim of trespass.