VirnetX's $625M FaceTime lawsuit victory against Apple tossed, two retrials ordered

Posted:
in General Discussion
A federal judge has tossed out a February ruling requiring Apple to pay patent holding company VirnetX $625.5 million over secure communications patents used in FaceTime and iMessage, and has ordered two complete retrials.




U.S. District Judge Robert Schroeder noted in his ruling that jurors in the damages retrial were likely confused by multiple references to the earlier cases, and leaned too heavily on the previous jury rulings for damages determination.

"The repeated references to the prior jury verdict in the consolidated case resulted in an unfair trial," ruled Schroeder.

"We are disappointed," VirnetX Chief Executive Kendall Larsen said regarding the ruling. "We are reviewing all our options and will follow the court's direction as we start preparing for these retrials."

Apple has as of yet made no comment on the ruling.

VirnetX is mostly a patent aggregation company, with a single communications platform it launched in 2014, years after the litigation with Apple began. The VirnetX Gabriel small- and medium-sized business collaboration suite has seen few updates since the April 2014 update and December 2014 widening of the pre-release program.

The first trial found Apple's VPN on Demand feature, used in iOS 3 through iOS 6, in infringement of a pair of VirnetX patents. In addition, Apple was found to have willfully infringed on the patent portfolio with FaceTime, iMessage, and VPN on Demand implementations during the second trial.

Both verdicts were ultimately rejected on appeal in September 2015. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit called for a damages retrial.

After a week, the retrial jury in East Texas Federal District Court made a unanimous decision against Apple's FaceTime, iMessage and VPN services use, as well as the devices running them, finding each in infringement of VirnetX intellectual property. VirnetX was awarded $625 million as a result. Apple immediately appealed the decision, leading to late Friday's retrial order.

In May, VirnetX called for a FaceTime ban, and an additional $190 million to penalize Apple for being a "poster child" for questionable patent-related legal tactics, on top of the $625 million it had been awarded.

The first of the two retrials will start on September 26. As a result, the VirnetX stock price has plummeted from $4.33 at the end of Friday's trading day to $2.51 per share.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 18,605member
    Surprisingly fast court re-schedule. Starts in September? Really?
  • Reply 2 of 14
    As a result, the VirnetX stock price has plummeted from $4.33 at the end of Friday's trading day to $2.51 per share.
    Buying opportunity, guys!  :D
    edited August 2016 mac fanSpamSandwich
  • Reply 3 of 14
    They should toss VernetX out of existence.

    magman1979
  • Reply 4 of 14
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 783member
    The first trial found Apple's VPN on Demand feature, used in iOS 3 through iOS 6, in infringement of 
    In May, VirnetX called for a FaceTime ban, and an additional $190 million to penalize Apple for being a "poster child" for questionable patent-related legal tactics, on top of the $625 million it had been awarded.
    VirnetX got that reversed. VirnetX deserves the $190 million penalty and no award.
  • Reply 5 of 14
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,266member
    gatorguy said:
    Surprisingly fast court re-schedule. Starts in September? Really?
    Must be "Sweeps Week".
  • Reply 6 of 14
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 29,266member
    As a result, the VirnetX stock price has plummeted from $4.33 at the end of Friday's trading day to $2.51 per share.
    Buying opportunity, guys!  :D
    Sell! Sell! Se... No, BUY! BUY! BUY!
  • Reply 7 of 14
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,616member
    As a result, the VirnetX stock price has plummeted from $4.33 at the end of Friday's trading day to $2.51 per share.
    Buying opportunity, guys!  D

    Dang! Coffee all over the screen… 
    edited August 2016
  • Reply 8 of 14
    Wow. Some semblance of sanity in US courts? What's going on!?
    lostkiwi
  • Reply 9 of 14
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,011member
    That patent troll should be wiped of the earth (and beyond), the people behind this facade should be sued into the ground.
    Patents in general obstruct innovation as is shown to be the case from the start (Dutch windmill patents of district Amsterdam drove everyone away to the Zaanstreek where they didn't have to pay an patent fee).
    Only a specific implementation should be patentable, similar to copyright, and a working product in al its finesse showing all that's claimed for the working life of the product should be demonstrated; also no company should be able to renew a patent on arbitrary ground (like the medical industry does at large, holding millions of people hostage); patents should also be valid for short periods of time, maybe 2 to 3 years to prevent a very good implementation to be used.
    edited August 2016
  • Reply 10 of 14

    In May, VirnetX called for a FaceTime ban, and an additional $190 million to penalize Apple for being a "poster child" for questionable patent-related legal tactics, on top of the $625 million it had been awarded.
    Apple has questionable patent-related legal tactics?

    "Hello Mr Kettle, I'm Mr Pot. You're black"
    EsquireCats
  • Reply 11 of 14
    davendaven Posts: 457member
    VirnetX used to have a small office (their headquarters) in a small strip mall in Zephyr Cove, NV. By small I mean a studio apartment sized office. When I drove by the site a couple of monts ago, I didn't see it anymore. I doubt they ever did anything productive. How is such a shady operation even listed on the stock exchange?
  • Reply 12 of 14
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 1,721member
    knowitall said:
    patents should also be valid for short periods of time, maybe 2 to 3 years to prevent a very good implementation to be used.
    I think more in the 10 year range. Just because it can take time to get a product out into the market and make a profit. It's the ones that drag on forever. Music, Film, Book's. These days nothing seems to go into the Public Domain. The person that created the song, or the book, etc, long DEAD and the family members are still living off of it for years to come. It's the whole Micky Mouse thing.
  • Reply 13 of 14
    " the retrial jury in East Texas Federal District Court "..... 'nuff said.
  • Reply 14 of 14
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,579member
    It is time to petition for the closing of the East Texas Federal District Court simply based on abuse by patent trolls. It is absurd that this joke of a court still exists. At the minimum, they should lose the ability to conduct patent trials.
    edited August 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.