Patna HC: Disciplinary Authority Cannot Impose Major and Minor Penalties in a Single Order  ||  Calcutta HC: Landlord Decides His Residential Needs; Courts Cannot Set Living Standards in Eviction  ||  Orissa HC: Second Marriage During Subsistence of First Remains Invalid Even After First Wife's Death  ||  Karnataka HC: Appeals Against Acquittal in Bailable Offences Lie Only Before High Court  ||  Supreme Court: Stamp Duty on an Agreement to Sell is Leviable Only if Possession is Transferred  ||  SC: Motive Becomes Irrelevant When Direct Evidence Such as a Dying Declaration is Available  ||  Supreme Court Issues Directions to CoC in Builder Insolvency Cases To Protect Homebuyers’ Interests  ||  MP High Court: Women Retain Reservation Benefits After Marriage if Caste is Recognized in Both States  ||  Allahabad HC: Police Must Prosecute Informants of False Firs, and IOs May Face Contempt if They Fail  ||  MP HP: Over-Age Candidate Cannot Claim Age Relaxation Due to Delay in Earlier Recruitment    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved