Munich Court throws out Qualcomm patent infringement lawsuit against Apple: No infringement

“The Munich I Regional Court (‘Landgericht München I’ in German) just announced the first final judgment on a Qualcomm v. Apple patent infringement complaint anywhere in the world. Apple (and, by extension, Intel) fended off one of various Qualcomm patent infringement lawsuits,” Florian Mueller writes for FOSS Patents. “The court agreed with Apple’s claim construction.”

Mueller writes, “A three-judge panel–composed of Judge Dr. Schoen (‘Schön’ in German), who filled in for Presiding Judge Dr. Zigann at last week’s trial, and Judges Klein and Schmitz–held that Apple’s iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus do not infringe Qualcomm’s European patent EP1199750 on a ‘post[-]passivation interconnection scheme on top of [an] IC chip.'”

“Qualcomm is represented in Germany by a team of Quinn Emanuel lawyers led by Dr. Marcus Grosch. He’s a tremendous fighter in every sense of the word and will probably appeal this decision to the Munich Higher Regional Court (“Oberlandesgericht München” in German,” Mueller writes. “However, the fact that the ruling came down just one week after trial — normally it takes several weeks, and in complex cases even months — suggests that Apple had a non-infringement argument that made this a very clear case…”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Things are going poorly for the Qualcomm extortionists.

Qualcomm’s unreasonable, illogical, and irrational licensing scam, which charges a percentage of the total cost of all components in the phone, even non-Qualcomm components, must end.

And, by the looks of things, Qualcomm’s scam will end sooner than later!

20-year-old court filing comes back to haunt Qualcomm in antitrust dispute with U.S FTC – October 5, 2018
U.S. ITC judge denies Qualcomm’s request, won’t stop iPhone imports – September 29, 2018
Qualcomm accuses Apple of stealing ‘vast swaths’ of chip secrets and passing them to Intel – September 25, 2018
Qualcomm dealt another blow in second ITC action against Apple – September 19, 2018
Qualcomm CEO sees chance of Apple settlement this year – September 18, 2018
Qualcomm makes a tactical error in its battle with Apple – September 7, 2018
Magistrate judge rebukes Qualcomm for iPhone patent infringement allegations it originally chose not to bring – September 6, 2018
EU regulators charge Qualcomm with additional violation in pricing case – July 19, 2018
Apple petitions U.S. Patent Office to invalidate four Qualcomm patents – June 22, 2018
Apple brings 5G and national security into Qualcomm patent battle – June 18, 2018
Analyst: Apple, Qualcomm legal fight could settle this year – June 11, 2018
Apple CEO Tim Cook to be deposed in Qualcomm lawsuit – April 6, 2018
Judge Koh sets aside sanctions order against Apple in FTC v. Qualcomm antitrust case – February 8, 2018
Apple gets support from Lawyers for Civil Justice in fight against discovery sanctions – February 1, 2018
EU fines chipmaker Qualcomm $1.2 billion for paying Apple to shut out rivals’ chips – January 24, 2018
Apple sanctioned in Qualcomm FTC case for withholding documents – December 22, 2017
Apple countersues Qualcomm for patent infringement – November 29, 2017
Apple designing next-gen iPhones, iPads that would dump Qualcomm components – October 31, 2017


  1. Suck it, Qualcomm, especially your arrogant CEO.

    I’m curious if this judgment will adversely affect Qualcomm’s share price. Probably not. It’s one of those companies where bad news doesn’t change the share price to any degree. Investors seem to be in it for the long haul.

  2. Always happy for the feeling of schadenfreude on hearing bad news for Qualcomm. An arrogant company like this needs to be slapped down hard and put in their place in the most embarrassing way. The CEO needs a lesson too in reality, excessive greed and overreaching. I only wish there were also some mandatory flogging element involved for him personally as part of the correcting ‘tude.

    1. Agree with your every word, Peter. Unfortunately, the largest arrogant company in the universe is Apple. Particularly the thin obsession, loss of ports, absent regular updates of his design tone-deaf highness, Sir Ive…

      1. There are varieties of arrogance, GoeB. I know, because I’ve known a number of men; never mind how many. As a result of personal experience I can say that arrogance, in itself, is not disqualifying. Take you, for example. I find your arrogance rather appealing, and in a similar vein both Steve Ballmer and Steve Jobs were arrogant but nonetheless compelling.

        So what I am saying is that arrogance is not an absolute negative. It depends upon what’s at stake. I was there when Steve Jobs cancelled the Newton, and when he embraced Microsoft as an investor, and when he faced down Adobe. In each of those encounters, and in many others, he was labelled “arrogant” as a way to diminish him. The same feeble tactic has been recycled in attacks against president Trump. Myself, I sense that arrogance is no longer perceived as such except by people that are wanting for excuses to hate, as for example Experts — OK, they have evidence but they are arrogant! Besides, I have often been called “arrogant” myself when arguing with someone who didn’t like the points I was making. It didn’t help that I happened to be a woman, but that’s almost beside the point.

        Emotion doesn’t counteract reason, but it somehow continues to rule the world. God, how I wish we could all simply compare notes instead of grievances.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.