Caltech ends $1 billion patent case against Apple and Broadcom

This is what the iPhone looked like when Caltech's legal case began

Caltech's seven-year legal battle over Apple and Broadcom allegedly using its Wi-Fi patents has now been settled.

The case was expected to be concluded after the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) said in a court filing in August 2023 that a "potential settlement [has been] reached." That filing gave no more details, but said that a previously-scheduled status conference would continue on August 24, 2023.

It was also reported that the three companies were due to file a new, joint status report by August 18, 2023. It's not clear now whether that happened on schedule, but according to Reuters, Caltech has now formally filed a "request for dismissal" of the case.

The full, and rather short, court filing says that the company wishes to "hereby request and stipulate that all claims and counterclaims... be dismissed with prejudice." It stated this specifically over its dispute with Broadcom, but then added another line about Apple.

"In addition, Caltech respectfully requests that all counterclaims asserted by Apple also be dismissed with prejudice, with each party bearing its own costs and attorneys' fees," it continues. "Broadcom does not oppose this request."

Dismissing the case "with prejudice" means it cannot be refiled.

The case began in 2016 with Caltech accusing Apple and Broadcom of violating four of its Wi-Fi patents. In 2020, it won the case, with Apple ordered to pay $838 million for patent infringement, and Broadcom to pay $270 million.

Naturally, Apple and Broadcom appealed, and in 2022 did get a new trial. Significantly, though, the new trial was concerned only with the amount of damages the companies were to pay — there was no question of overturning the guilty verdict.

None of the companies involved have commented publicly on the settlement.

Follow AppleInsider on Google News

Latest comparisons

11 Comments

entropys 4167 comments · 13 Years

About 6 months ago

I always found this case strange, at least why Apple was involved at all. Broadcom made the chips, and should be responsible for ensuring patents were covered. Apple bought the broadcom chips, but was somehow supposed to know if Broadcom was violating patents and thus wa also violating the patents.

seems like a chasing the biggest pocket strategy

carnegie 1078 comments · 10 Years

AppleInsider said:

...

It was also reported that the three companies were due to file a new, joint status report by August 18, 2023. It's not clear now whether that happened on schedule, but according to Reuters, Caltech has now formally filed a "request for dismissal" of the case.

...

They did file that status report as well as several additional status reports between then and now.

entropys said:

I always found this case strange, at least why Apple was involved at all. Broadcom made the chips, and should be responsible for ensuring patents were covered. Apple bought the broadcom chips, but was somehow supposed to know if Broadcom was violating patents and thus wa also violating the patents.

seems like a chasing the biggest pocket strategy

That's how patent law works. Making, selling, offering to sell, or importing a patented invention without authority is infringement, but so is using a patented invention without authority. So in theory you or I could be sued for using an iPhone which infringes a given patent if we use it in a way that infringes that patent - e.g., if we use the camera and something about its functioning infringes that patent.

Interesting. But should it not be that it is Broadcom using the patent, not Apple? I guess it is like receiving stolen goods?

The due diligence on purchasing complex hardware must be excruciating. And of course favour big companies with the capacity to do so over the little guy.

Xed 2575 comments · 4 Years

carnegie said:

entropys said:

I always found this case strange, at least why Apple was involved at all. Broadcom made the chips, and should be responsible for ensuring patents were covered. Apple bought the broadcom chips, but was somehow supposed to know if Broadcom was violating patents and thus wa also violating the patents.

seems like a chasing the biggest pocket strategy

That's how patent law works. Making, selling, offering to sell, or importing a patented invention without authority is infringement, but so is using a patented invention without authority. So in theory you or I could be sued for using an iPhone which infringes a given patent if we use it in a way that infringes that patent - e.g., if we use the camera and something about its functioning infringes that patent.

But Apple is also more culpable to be found over 3x more liable financially than Broadcom?

And did Broadcom not have a single other customer than Apple for a the infringing WiFi chips?

I feel like there is some missing info since the beginning of this lawsuit.