Three suits filed by Apple and Qualcomm on busy day for US court
The complex patent dispute between Apple and Qualcomm took another twist this week with three filings being made on Wednesday, November 29.
The day began when Apple filed a counter-claim (pdf) at the US District Court for the Southern District of California.
It alleged that Qualcomm’s Snapdragon mobile phone chips that power a wide variety of Android-based devices infringe Apple’s patents.
This was filed in response to a complaint by Qualcomm in July which accused Apple of infringing patents that “enable high performance in a smartphone while extending battery life”.
Later on Wednesday, Qualcomm filed two complaints at the same court.
The first complaint accused Apple of infringing US patent numbers 8,683,362; 8,497,928; 7,844,037; and 9,203,940, relating to a range of technologies including those which allow multiple apps to run at once, camera focusing techniques and methods of responding to incoming calls and texts.
Qualcomm alleged the infringement took place in a range of Apple devices.
In the second complaint, Qualcomm stated Apple infringed a further six patents: US numbers 8,971,861; 7,834,591; 8,768,865; 8,229,043; 8,447,132; and 9,024,418.
The patents relate to a range of technologies including power management, machine learning and technology that makes phone calls clearer.
Qualcomm’s two complaints came on the back of another separate complaint it had filed the day before which accused Apple of infringing a further five patents relating to radio frequency transceivers and image enhancement.
And yesterday, November 30, Qualcomm also filed a complaint to the US International Trade Commission (ITC) which sought a ban on the import and sale of certain iPhones that use its patented modem technology.
However, in a statement, general counsel at Qualcomm Don Rosenberg denied that Qualcomm’s filings were in response to Apple’s counter-claims.
“You can’t react that quickly to file lawsuits,” he explained.
“The complaints involve a group of 16 patents that are additional to the ones we have already sued them on, and five of those 16 are ones we are suing them on in the ITC seeking an exclusion order.”
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today’s top stories:
Lawyers disappointed by ‘fiendishly technical’ Red Bull decision
Unwired Planet confidentiality issues resolved
EU General Court rules that ‘Real’ cannot be trademarked
INTA Berlin 2017: Lego blueprints may be future in 3D printing world
INTA Berlin 2017: Why CSR is crucial for brands
INTA Berlin 2017: Pacari Chocolate founder talks building a sustainable business
