News & Analysis as of

Qualcomm Apple

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Expert Need Not Have Acquired the Requisite Skill Level Prior to the Time of the Invention

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

White & Case LLP

EU General Court quashes Qualcomm antitrust fine for "exclusivity payments", and censures the EU Commission for multiple due...

White & Case LLP on

The General Court of the European Union delivered a blow to the European Commission in fully annulling its Qualcomm (exclusivity payments) decision of 2018 and a EUR 997 million fine. Qualcomm v Commission1 is the first...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Inter Partes Review May Not Rely Solely on Admitted Prior Art

In Qualcomm Incorporated v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit held that applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) may not be the basis of an invalidity ground in an inter partes review (IPR), and therefore, an IPR petition cannot...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

IP Alert: Federal Circuit Nixes Admitted Prior Art as Basis for IPR

On February 1, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit held that Apple could not base an inter partes review (IPR) challenge of a Qualcomm patent solely on “applicant admitted prior art” (AAPA) found in the patent...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

In Qualcomm v. Apple, Federal Circuit Rules Out Applicant Admitted Prior Art As the “Basis” for Inter Partes Review

On the first of February, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) on two inter partes review (“IPR”)...more

Jones Day

CAFC Holds Applicant Admitted Prior Art Cannot be the Basis of an IPR Ground

Jones Day on

Section 311(b) limits inter partes review to “ground[s] that could be raised under section 102 or 103 and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications.” 35 U.S.C. § 311(b) (emphasis added). An...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Applicant Admitted Prior Art Cannot Be a “Basis For” an IPR Challenge

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a decision dated February 1, 2022, the Federal Circuit confirmed that applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) may not form the basis of a validity challenge in an inter partes review (IPR). The decision arose out of two IPRs...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2021

Knobbe Martens on

Venue and Pleading Infringement in Hatch-Waxman Litigation Turn on Location and Identity of ANDA Filer - In Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharm. et al., Appeal No. 21-1154, the Federal Circuit held that in Hatch-Waxman...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No More Bites at the Apple: Imminent and Non-Speculative Standing Still Required

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated that a patent challenger did not have Article III appellate standing to obtain review of a final Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling because the underlying...more

Knobbe Martens

No Standing for Second Bite at the Apple

Knobbe Martens on

APPLE, INC. v. QUALCOMM, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Apple lacked standing to appeal an IPR decision upholding patents that Apple licenses from...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Ninth Circuit Limits Ability of Indirect Purchaser Classes to Bring Nationwide Suits

The Ninth Circuit has held that a putative class of nationwide consumers that brought damages claims under California law was erroneously certified. Until now, class actions asserting claims for plaintiffs across the country...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

The PTAB Review - July 2021

This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief summary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent pronouncement about America Invents Act (AIA) reviews. It then provides an update on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

. License Agreement Not Enough for Standing on Appeal of an IPR Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc.

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a precedential decision, the Federal Circuit held that Apple lacked standing to appeal from its loss as petitioner in a couple of inter partes reviews (IPRs) against patent owner Qualcomm. Background - Qualcomm sued...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

When Is Less Really More for a Patent Licensee?

In Apple v. Qualcomm, Federal Circuit Finds No Standing to Challenge Validity of a Few Patents When Many Were Licensed - The development timeline for small-molecule drugs and biologics is lengthy, estimated to take...more

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Insufficient Evidence to Establish Standing to Appeal IPR Decisions in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc.

Haug Partners LLP on

On April 7 2021, the Federal Circuit in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 20-1561, — F.3d —-, 2021 WL 1287437, *1, *5 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 7, 2021), held that Apple failed to establish standing to appeal inter partes review (IPR)...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

The Federal Circuit Provides New Guidance for Patent Licensees Wishing to Challenge the Licensed Patent’s Validity

The Federal Circuit in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated handed down a decision on April 7, 2021 that provides guidance on the determination of standing for patent licensees who wish to contest the validity of a patent or...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Second Bite at the Apple: Injury Must Be Imminent and Non-Speculative to Support Standing

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a party did not have Article III appellate standing to obtain review of a final ruling of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board because the underlying district court...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Holds Apple Lacked Standing to Appeal IPRs It Initiated, Distinguishes MedImmune

On April 7, in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated, the Federal Circuit held that Apple lacked standing to appeal final decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), upholding validity in two inter partes review...more

Knobbe Martens

Licensee Lacks Standing to Appeal an Adverse IPR Decision Based On Royalty Payments for a Patent Portfolio and a Speculative...

Knobbe Martens on

APPLE, INC. v. QUALCOMM, INC. Before Moore, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Apple lacked standing to appeal an IPR decision upholding patents it licenses from Qualcomm, despite...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2021

Wi-LAN Inc. v. Sharp Electronics Corporation, Appeal Nos. 2020-1041, -1043 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 6, 2021) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed issues of claim construction and various issues...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Financial Daily Dose 10.29.2020 | Top Story: Stocks Lose Most Since June as Renewed Covid Fears Set In

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Wall Street had another come-to-Jesus day over the troubling recent Covid trends, as surging cases throughout the U.S. and across Europe drove markets to their worst performance since June....more

White & Case LLP

Taiwan in the changing global landscape - Europe again has the technology sector in its target zone (Guidance for Taiwanese...

White & Case LLP on

For many years, the European Commission (the Commission) has been the global leader in applying antitrust law to the technology sector. This year is no exception. Indeed, there have been a number of new European enforcement...more

Sunstein LLP

No License, No Chips: Qualcomm’s Controversial Licensing Strategy Is Not an Antitrust Violation

Sunstein LLP on

Qualcomm has for years dominated the market for cellphone chips. Its patented technologies have been included in many cellphone standards on the condition, common among standards setting organizations (SSOs), that Qualcomm...more

Kidon IP

The ACT | APPLE Association Charade

Kidon IP on

Apple and the Fearsome five are doing it again.   The same people who pushed the fallacious “troll bogeyman”; engaged in PTAB proxy warfare, seemingly immunized by the “real party in interest doctrine”;  invented  the...more

45 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide