Wisconsin judge dismisses Apple v. Motorola patent case

The move came just hours before the trial was due to begin

A highly anticipated patent infringement case between Apple and Motorola Mobility was dismissed by a Wisconsin district court Monday, hours before the trial was due to begin.

The two companies were arguing over license rates for patents owned by Motorola that cover parts of the wireless UMTS, GPRS, GSM and 802.11 standards. The patents are vital parts of the technologies and so Motorola Mobility is required to license them to competitors on "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms," often referred to by the acronym FRAND.

At issue was where the boundary lay between reasonable and unreasonable terms.

Last week Apple told the court it would pay up to $1 per device for a license to Motorola patents covering cellular and Wi-Fi technologies. Motorola Mobility was arguing for a royalty payment of 2.25 percent on each device.

However, Apple said that if the court found in Motorola's favor and instructed Apple to pay more than $1, Apple would pursue all possible appeals against the ruling.

The presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Crabb, didn't take kindly to Apple's offer.

"At the final pretrial conference, I asked Apple to explain why it believed the court should determine a FRAND rate even though the rate may not resolve the parties' licensing or infringement disputes," Judge Crabb wrote in an order on Friday. "I questioned whether it was appropriate for a court to undertake the complex task of determining a FRAND rate if the end result would be simply a suggestion that could be used later as a bargaining chip between the parties."

"Apple responded that the rate would resolve the dispute in this particular case, namely, whether Motorola's license offer was FRAND and if not, what the rate should have been. Apple's response was not satisfactory and did not assuage my concerns about determining a FRAND rate that may be used solely as a negotiating tool between the parties," she wrote.

The two companies were given until Monday morning to persuade the court as to why the case should go ahead.

The minutes of the courtroom proceedings Monday indicate that Judge Crabb found "that case can not proceed to trial on remaining issue; case dismissed with prejudice." However, the judge's final ruling has not been published yet.

Join the Good Gear Guide newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags AppleBarbara Crabbintellectual propertylegalpatentMotorola Mobility

Struggling for Christmas presents this year? Check out our Christmas Gift Guide for some top tech suggestions and more.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Martyn Williams

IDG News Service

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Shopping.com

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Shopping.com

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?