“Apple and Qualcomm continued feuding over alleged witness tampering, as the iPhone maker reiterated Tuesday it had reason to suspect its key witness had been influenced ahead of his testimony at a patent infringement trial in San Diego,” Richard Nieva reports for CNET. “In a filling on Tuesday, Apple counsel Juanita Brooks wrote that the iPhone maker had grounds to suspect someone was trying to sway Arjuna Siva’s testimony, though she said the company doesn’t know who. The iPhone maker has argued that Siva, a former Apple engineer, co-invented technology in one of three disputed Qualcomm patents and should be named on it.”

“‘Apple had good reason to be concerned that steps were being taken to influence Mr. Siva’s testimony,’ Brooks wrote in the filing,” Nieva reports. “When Apple first made the allegation last week, Qualcomm said it was ‘ridiculous’ and vigorously denied the claim. Judge Dana Sabraw, who is presiding over the case, also said there was “no evidence” for the allegation.”

“Siva, who now works at Google, testified on Monday after Apple said last week he was no longer intending on appearing in court,” Nieva reports. “He said many elements of a boot-up technology covered by the patent were ‘my idea,’ but stopped short of claiming he was an inventor.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: What’s actually “ridicuolous” is a former Apple engineeer “who now works at Google” testifying that many elements of a patent were his ideas, invented by him, but inexplicably not wanting to be listed on the patent.

What’s even more ridiculous is Qualcomm’s predatory, illogical, and irrational licensing scam, which charges a percentage of the total cost of all components in the phone, even non-Qualcomm components.

SEE ALSO:
Former Apple engineer says Qualcomm tech was his idea but doesn’t claim inventor status – March 11, 2019
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