Apple denied bid for rehearing in VirnetX patent case

Apple v. VirnetX. Image: Apple's Group FaceTime
Apple’s Group FaceTime
On Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a request by Apple that it reconsider a split decision it issued on November 22 in the long-running litigation which upheld a finding that Apple iPhones infringed VirnetX patents relating to secure communications technology, FaceTime, in particular.

Jan Wolfe for Reuters:

In the November ruling, a three-judge panel of the court voided a jury’s calculation that Apple should pay $503 million for infringing VirnetX patents.

But in a partial victory for VirnetX, the Federal Circuit left in place a Texas jury’s finding that some versions of the iPhone infringed two VirnetX patents, setting the stage for another trial.

Apple had urged all of the judges sitting on the court to reconsider that part of the three-judge panel’s decision.

MacDailyNews Take: This saga — which we’ve been covering since November 1, 2011 — might just last longer than the making of all nine Star Wars episodes.

Here is VirnetX’s boilerplate description of the company: VirnetX Holding Corporation is an Internet security software and technology company with patented technology for secure communications including 4G LTE security. The company’s software and technology solutions, including its secure domain name registry and Gabriel Connection Technology™, are designed to facilitate secure communications and to create a secure environment for real-time communication applications such as instant messaging, VoIP, smart phones, eReaders and video conferencing. The company’s patent portfolio includes over 112 U.S. and international patents and over 75 pending applications.

1 Comment

  1. Why don’t Apple just buy them? The market cap is 300M. They get rid of the annoying lawsuit plus acquire the patent tech. Buy enough shares to do a hostile takeover and bob’s your uncle.
    If this isn’t what Apple’s cash is for then I don’t know what is. On the basis of the this latest court decision, it would save Apple several $100M.

Reader Feedback

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