“A former Apple engineer testified Monday that some of his ideas are at the heart of a contentious intellectual property case, but stopped short of claiming he’s an inventor on a disputed Qualcomm patent,” Richard Nieva reports for CNET.

“Arjuna Siva, a former Apple engineer, made the statements in testimony during a trial in San Diego over three patents that Qualcomm alleges Apple infringed in some models of its popular iPhone. Apple has argued that Siva should be named as a co-inventor of one of those patents, which covers technology that allows a smartphone to quickly connect to the internet once the device has booted up,” Nieva reports. “On Monday, Siva, who canceled an original appearance at the trial only to later reverse that decision, didn’t ask for credit for the patent in his testimony. ‘I don’t think I’m claiming to be an inventor,’ Siva, who now works at Google, told the court.”

“Siva’s testimony may create a challenge for Apple, which had seen him as a key witness. After Siva backed out of testifying, Apple filed a subpoena for him to appear,” Nieva reports. “Though the engineer didn’t claim to be an inventor, he did say he contributed to several elements of the technology that makes the boot-up process faster. ‘This was my idea,’ he told the court. He also said he was ‘surprised’ and ‘upset’ after Qualcomm filed for the patent. After Siva was dismissed from the stand, Apple reiterated its argument that he was a co-inventor of the technology. ‘I believe Mr. Siva should have been included’ on the patent, said Bill Lin, an Apple expert witness and computer science professor at the University of California, San Diego.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: So much for him being a “tainted witness,” we guess.

Regardless, if it was Siva’s idea, he most certainly should have been included on the patent.

SEE ALSO:
Apple loses star witness Arjuna Siva in Qualcomm trial – March 7, 2019
Apple says Qualcomm stole idea for smartphone boot-up tech from engineer – March 5, 2019
The Qualcomm v. Apple patent jury won’t get these simple, brutally honest instructions – March 5, 2019