Supreme Court: Imminent Death Not Required For a Statement to Qualify as Dying Declaration  ||  SC: HC Cannot Grant Pre-Arrest Bail Without Quashing FIR; Accused Must Approach Sessions Court First  ||  SC: Agreed Interest Rate Cannot Be Challenged as Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Override Contract  ||  SC: Agreed Interest Rate Cannot Be Challenged as Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Override Contract  ||  SC: GST Exemption on Residential Lease Applies When Building is Sub-Leased for Hostel/PG Use  ||  Rajasthan High Court: Universities Cannot Retain Students’ Original Documents for Pending Fees  ||  NCLT: Damages from Contractual Disputes Cannot Form Basis for Initiating Insolvency Proceedings  ||  Del HC: Pre-SCN Consultation is Unnecessary in Large-Scale GST Fraud Cases with Complex Transactions  ||  Calcutta HC: Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Violates Natural Justice and Sets Aside the Award  ||  Raj HC Upholds Padmesh Mishra’s AAG Appointment, Noting Advocacy Skill isn’t Tied to Experience    

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