Yesterday, InterDigital prevailed in its Delaware jury trial against ZTE where the jury found that ZTE’s accused phones infringe each asserted claims of InterDigital’s U.S. Patent Nos. 7,190,966, 7,286,847, and 8,380,244. The verdict form also shows that the jury found none of the asserted claims to be invalid as obvious. The jury was not asked
Jury verdicts
Jury verdict: Apple does not infringe GPNE’s alleged standard essential patents
A California federal jury handed Apple a substantial victory over patent-plaintiff GPNE yesterday afternoon, finding Apple’s iPhone and iPad products do not infringe three GPNE patents alleged to be essential to GPRS and LTE standards. After less than one day of deliberations following a two-week trial, the jury issued a verdict form finding that none…
Fujitsu breached RAND obligation and must show cause why patent not unenforceable against Tellabs (Fujitsu v. Tellabs)
Yesterday, a jury returned a verdict finding that Fujitsu had breached its standard-setting obligations to offer its declared ‘737 Patent (now expired) to Tellabs on reasoanble and non-discriminatory terms (RAND). Judge Holderman then issued an order to show to cause why the patent should not be held unenforceable as to Tellabs. This case presents many…
Belkin dismissed with prejudice pursuant to settlement agreement in Ericsson v. D-Link (E.D. Tex.)
Last summer, we reported on a jury verdict and post-trial rulings in favor of SEP patent holder Ericsson in its infringement suit against several manufacturers of WiFi-compliant products. As we noted, the jury awarded several million dollars for infringement of Ericsson’s 802.11-essential patents. Thereafter, several defendants took an appeal to the Federal Circuit, which is…
Apple does not infringe Golden Bridge’s alleged WCDMA standard essential patent (Golden Bridge v. Apple)
Yesterday a jury returned a verdict finding that Apple does not infringe Golden Bridge’s patent alleged to be essential to the WCDMA standard. The verdict thus did not reach the royalty-rate issue that was interesting for a few reasons.
Excluded FRAND Expert Testimony. As discussed in our May 30, 2014 post, Magistrate Judge…
Jury finds BlackBerry did not infringe NXP’s alleged standard essential patents (NXP v. BlackBerry)
Yesterday, a Florida jury returned a verdict that BlackBerry did not infringe NXP’s patents alleged to be essential to the IEEE 802.11 WiFi and JEDEC eMMC standards and that the asserted patent claims were invalid. The role of BlackBerry’s standard essential patent defenses is not clear from the record, though it appears to have been…
ITC terminates LSI-Realtek 337 investigation without addressing RAND issues (Inv. No. 337-TA-837)
Yesterday the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issued a Notice that it was terminating the investigation of whether certain LSI 802.11 and H.264 alleged standard essential patents were infringed by Realtek and others given various circumstances that mooted the investigation as to most patents and a finding of no liability for the remaining patent. In…
Jury returns RAND-royalty rate of 0.19 percent of WiFi chip sale price (Realtek v. LSI)
Yesterday, the jury in the Realtek v. LSI case before Judge Whyte returned a verdict finding that a RAND royalty for LSI’s two patents alleged essential to IEEE 802.11 WiFi standard would total about 0.19% of the total sales prices of Realtek’s WiFi chips (0.12% for one patent plus 0.07% for the other). This RAND…
Motorola appeals to Federal Circuit Judge Robart’s Rule 54(b) judgment on RAND issues
Today Judge Robart issued an Order certifying a Rule 54(b) judgment in the Microsoft v. Motorola case where he had issued a first of its kind RAND rate ruling on Motorola H.264 and 802.11 standard essential patents (SEPs) and sustained the jury verdict that Motorola breached its RAND obligations in offering a license to Microsoft. …
Jury finds Wi-LAN’s alleged SEP invalid and not infringed by Apple
Today, an E.D. Tex. jury in Wi-LAN v. Apple returned a verdict that the asserted claims 1 and 10 of Wi-LAN’s RE37,802 Patent (“the ‘802 Patent”) were invalid and not infringed by Apple. The ‘802 Patent has been a centerpiece for Wi-LAN’s prolific patent litigations and settlements thereof. Wi-LAN has asserted that the ‘802 Patent…