Supreme Court asks feds to weigh in on Apple patent dispute

in General Discussion
The U.S. Supreme Court has asked for government input on Apple and Broadcom's bid to revive a patent dispute with Caltech, prior to a summer retrial on damages.

Apple wants to challenge Caltech patents again
Apple wants to challenge Caltech patents again

The California Institute of Technology sued the two companies in 2016, alleging that they and other companies violated several of its patents on Wi-Fi technology in the iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple Watch, and other devices.

According to a report on Monday from Reuters, Supreme Court asked for the U.S. Solicitor General's input on a lower court decision that prevented Apple and Broadcom from arguing the patents were invalid at trial.

Caltech versus Apple & Broadcom

A jury had found Apple and Broadcom guilty in 2020, awarding Caltech $1.1 billion to be paid by the two tech companies. However, Apple and Broadcom attempted to overturn the results of the trial, saying it had been conducted with "multiple legal errors."

"These rulings unfairly prejudiced appellants," the appeal brief said," and greatly hampered their ability to rebut Caltech's repeated emphasis at trial on the supposed importance of the patents-in-suit, which led to an enormous -- and unwarranted -- damages award."

Then, in 2022, a U.S. appeals court tossed out the verdict requiring Apple and Broadcom to pay damages, and ordered a new damages trial that would reconsider the awarded sum -- but not the patent infringement. That trial is set to begin in June.

Read on AppleInsider


  • Reply 1 of 3
    KTRKTR Posts: 268member
    I hope it goes in apple favor
  • Reply 2 of 3
    carnegiecarnegie Posts: 1,027member
    This is called a CVSG (Call for the Views of the Solicitor General). I haven't followed the Supreme Court as closely in recent years as I had previously. But in the past the Supreme Court would do this around 10 times a year and the Supreme Court granted cert (i.e. agreed to hear the case) far more often when it issued a CVSG as compared to when it didn't. Further, the Supreme Court followed the suggestion of the Solicitor General the majority of the time after asking for its views.

    So I'd say this is a positive development for Apple in this case.
Sign In or Register to comment.