US Supreme Court passes on Apple's bid to revive Qualcomm patent invalidation

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an Apple bid to revive an effort to invalidate a pair of Qualcomm patents, despite the settlement between the two companies.

The justices on Monday passed on Apple's appeal of a lower court ruling, stating that the iPhone maker lacked the standing to pursue the matter because of a settlement in 2019 between the two companies, Reuters has reported.

Qualcomm filed a lawsuit in 2017 against Apple, alleging that the company's iPhones and other devices infringed on some of its mobile patents. In 2019, the parties settled the litigation and signed an agreement that allowed Apple to continue using Qualcomm modems in its smartphones.

While that settlement included licenses to many of Qualcomm's patents, it also allowed an Apple bid to challenge the validity of two patents at the Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

The PTAB ruled in Qualcomm's favor. In November, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed Apple's appeal, stating that its settlement with Qualcomm precluded it from attempting to invalidate the San Diego chipmaker's patents.

Apple argued to the Supreme Court that Qualcomm could again sue it after the settlement expires in 2025, noting that the chipmaker has a "history of aggressively enforcing its patents."

In a brief to the Supreme Court in May, the Biden Administration urged the justices to reject Apple's appeal.

14 Comments

mikethemartian 18 Years · 1493 comments

About 2 years ago

Why didn’t they just settle all the issues between them in 2019 instead of leaving this matter unresolved?

gatorguy 13 Years · 24627 comments

mikethemartian said:

Why didn’t they just settle all the issues between them in 2019 instead of leaving this matter unresolved?

I imagine that Qualcomm thought all the issues WERE resolved with the licensing agreement. This is Apple, and both the Appeals Court and Scotus were correct in refusing to consider this after-the-fact move IMHO.

gatorguy said:

mikethemartian said:

Why didn’t they just settle all the issues between them in 2019 instead of leaving this matter unresolved?

I imagine that Qualcomm thought all the issues WERE resolved with the licensing agreement. This is Apple, and both the Appeals Court and Scotus were correct in refusing to consider this after-the-fact move IMHO.

To be clear here, Apple is the company that lost the appeal.

mikethemartian said:

gatorguy said:

mikethemartian said:

Why didn’t they just settle all the issues between them in 2019 instead of leaving this matter unresolved?

I imagine that Qualcomm thought all the issues WERE resolved with the licensing agreement. This is Apple, and both the Appeals Court and Scotus were correct in refusing to consider this after-the-fact move IMHO.

To be clear here, Apple is the company that lost the appeal.

Correct. It was not anything initiated by Qualcomm, which is why I said QC likely thought everything was settled when Apple agreed to take a new license. it was Apple trying to take on Qualcomm again after-the-fact. Since they had already come to a contract the courts properly told Apple that couldn't now argue they didn't REALLY agree to licensing the patents, and since they were paying a license to ALL the patents there's no harm no foul.

beowulfschmidt 12 Years · 2361 comments

AppleInsider said:

noting that the chipmaker has a "history of aggressively enforcing its patents."

Read on AppleInsider

As does Apple. As does any company that wishes to protect its intellectual property.