P&H High Court: Re-Investigation Cannot Nullify Existing Acquittal Despite Breach of Stay Order  ||  Gujarat HC: Illegal Mining Vehicle Complaints Must Be Filed Before Sessions Court, Not Magistrate  ||  Delhi High Court Lays Down Registry Directions for Dealing with Insufficiently Stamped Arbitral Award  ||  Delhi High Court: Victims Need No Leave to Appeal Acquittal or Conviction for Lesser Offence  ||  SC: Limitation Act Inapplicable to Revisions under Karnataka Land Revenue Act  ||  SC: Banks Can Invoke SARFAESI for Loans Acquired from NBFCs Outside the Act  ||  SC: Gujarat Prohibition Act Does not Bar Interim Seized Vehicle Release  ||  Supreme Court Quashes Rs. 425-Crore Customs Penalty Based on AI-Generated Fake Case Laws  ||  SC: Guilt cannot be Presumed Solely Due to Collusion Allegations against Investigating Officer  ||  SC: Clarificatory Statement Does Not Constitute a Binding Undertaking for Contempt Proceedings    

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