Apple Hit With $145M Patent Infringement Verdict
A jury found Apple infringed on voice-over LTE technology, which supports voice calls on an LTE network.
August 02, 2018 at 04:55 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Apple Inc. was hit with a $145 million patent infringement verdict in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California Wednesday over technology in many popular iPhone models.
A jury found Apple infringed on voice-over LTE technology (VoLTE), which supports voice calls on an LTE network, patented by plaintiff Canadian technology company WiLAN. Specifically, the case before Judge Dana M. Sabraw hinged on two WiLAN patents covering technology in various iPhone 6 and 7 models. As such, Apple was ordered to pay $145 million in damages.
According to court documents, WiLAN alleged Apple's use of the LTE technology was in violation of 35 U.S. Code Section 271. The company sought damages for “Apple's willful infringement of one or more claims of the patents-in-suit,” while also seeking to recover attorney fees.
Apple, for its part, moved for a judgment as a matter of law, arguing in court documents that WiLAN didn't present “legally sufficient evidence” indicating for a jury that Apple infringed the WiLAN patents in question, nor did it prove it was entitled to $145 million in damages.
Apple was represented by DLA Piper. In WiLAN's corner were attorneys from trial firm McKool Smith, including chairman Mike McKool, who told The Recorder that he and the firm “feel good” about the outcome.
“The jury deliberated for one hour, and we got every penny we asked for. And most of the jurors were Apple customers,” he said. “It's tough to beat Apple in California, so obviously we were gratified that we got the result we got.”
DLA Piper could not be immediately reached for comment.
The legal maneuvers underpinning the trial go back to 2014 when Apple and attorneys from Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy filed a complaint in California's Northern District demanding a jury trial, alleging “non-infringement, invalidity, and unenforceability” of the patents in question. The case was transferred to the Southern District later that year. The first jury trial was heard in late July.
WiLAN has a history of taking up claims against major tech companies. WiLAN subsidiary IPA sued 12 technology companies in Delaware federal court over patents related to Apple personal assistant Siri in 2017. In 2018, it filed suit over the technology underpinning Google's personal assistant.
In a separate 2013 litigation, WiLAN lost a lawsuit against Apple in the Eastern District of Texas over cellular data patents.
The verdict comes at a seeming high point for Apple, which on Thursday was valued as the first publicly traded U.S. $1 trillion company. Coincidentally, the news follows a strong Q3 earnings report, thanks in no small part to its signature iPhone product.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Better of the Split': District Judge Weighs Circuit Divide in Considering Who Pays Decades-Old Medical Bill
K&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
3 minute readIll. Class Action Claims Cannabis Companies Sell Products with Excessive THC Content
4 minute readPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250