Calcutta HC: Award May Be Set Aside if Tribunal Rewrites Contract or Ignores Key Clauses  ||  Delhi HC Suspends Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Life Term, Holding Section 5(C) of POCSO Not Made Out  ||  Calcutta High Court: Arbitration Clause in an Expired Lease Cannot be Invoked For a Fresh Lease  ||  Delhi High Court: 120-Day Timeline under Section 132B Of Income Tax Act is Not Mandatory  ||  NCLAT Reaffirms That Borrower's Debt Acknowledgment Also Extends Limitation Period for Guarantors  ||  NCLAT: Oppression & Mismanagement Petition Cannot Be Filed Without Company Membership on Filing Date  ||  Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy  ||  NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required  ||  NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes  ||  Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction    

Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc. - (16 Oct 2015)

Apple loses patent battle for mobile processors but pays less than expected

Intellectual Property Rights

A jury in Wisconsin has found Apple guilty of infringing patents owned by Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, or WARF. It awarded WARF $234 million in damages, which is probably less than was expected. At an earlier preliminary motion by Apple to strike out expert testimonies, a precursor to its trial strategy of proving the patent invalid, the judge had noted that Apple faced “prejudice…magnitudes greater than Microsoft” by a jury being swayed by enormous its revenue stream, despite the infringing part constituting only a fraction of the value. In Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., the jury had, after hearing submissions on Microsoft’s $19 billion revenues, awarded damages amounting to $388 million – ultimately leading to fresh trial for excessive damages.

WARF, the patent management organisation for the University of Wisconsin – Madison, had alleged that Apple had made unlicensed use of its patent in the architecture of processors, significantly improving their efficiency and performance. The infringing processors have been used in several versions of iPhones and iPads. Its complaint against Apple can be READ HERE, while Apple’s preliminary motion before commencement of trial can be ACCESSED HERE.

Tags : APPLE   PATENT   LOSE   WARF   PROCESSOR   IPHONE   IPAD   MILLION   DAMAGES  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved