Qualcomm’s battle with Apple has more twists than a pretzel
The Qualcomm vs. Apple legal battle rages on — and, boy, is it getting convoluted at this point!
In the latest legal decision in the case, Judge Lucy Koh denied a motion by plaintiffs that would have allowed them to block Qualcomm from getting the necessary permissions to block certain iPhone imports to the U.S. Got that?
Qualcomm, which has been feuding with Apple for much of the last two years, has been attempting to get a ban on iPhones that use an Intel chip instead of a Qualcomm one.
Qualcomm requested last year that the U.S. International Trade Commission place a “limited exclusion order” on all iPhones which use Intel’s 4G wireless modem. This is because Qualcomm is claiming patent infringement on six of its patents.
A group of Apple consumers then struck back, arguing that an import ban would having the effect of, “[freezing] out Intel’s nascent challenge to Qualcomm’s illegal monopoly” and could, “injure competition in a market already suffering from Qualcomm’s anticompetitive behavior.”
Unfortunately for them, Koh ruled in a San Jose, California hearing this week that the plaintiffs’ “claim of an imminent injury is too speculative,” due to the fact that the International Trade Commission had not imposed a ban. She did, however, say the plaintiffs could renew their motion in the future.
Earlier this year, a judge claimed that Apple was violating Qualcomm patents, and suggested import bans as an available solution. Apple has struck back at this verdict by saying that the patents shouldn’t have been awarded to begin with. Qualcomm, for its part, recently offered to lower the fees, and Apple has continued to use Qualcomm chips during the dispute.
And this, in short, is why lawsuits between giant companies never seem to end. And probably why some lawyers get to drive really nice cars!