Apple is asking a federal judge for a $5.7 billion judgment in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Tction Technology over the Taptic Engine used in iPhones and Apple Watches. Here are the details.
‘Unauthorized speculation on a large scale’
A few weeks ago, a jury ordered Apple to pay $5.7 billion for infringing two patents held by Taction Technology, related to the Taptic engine that now provides haptic feedback across its devices.
At the time, Apple said it disagreed with the jury’s verdict and the damages awarded, which it called “not supported by all the facts.”
Apple emphasized that its technology is “fundamentally different” from what is covered by Taction’s two patents, and announced plans to appeal.
Today, Apple filed a new motion asking the court to overturn the jury’s verdict, arguing that Taction failed to show enough evidence to support any damages award, let alone $5.7 billion, which the company notes is “the largest patent verdict in history, over $3 billion.”
Apple added that before trial, the court excluded an analysis by Taction’s damages expert due to flaws in the way the expert calculated royalties from the previous licensing agreement, and the expert was barred from testifying at all.
Apple also noted that Taction has never shown evidence that determines how much its patented technology is worth. Instead, it simply asked jurors to award whatever they deemed reasonable royalties, leaving them “no choice but to engage in unacceptable speculation on a large scale.”
From Apple’s move:
Tction told the jury to “only find a reasonable royalty for its contribution,” (…), but never offered evidence of how much that contribution was worth. Instead, it asked the jury to “award such reasonable royalties as you think fit.” (…) Tact failed to meet its burden of presenting evidence that would allow the jury to “attach a sufficient dollar amount to the infringing act,” (…). Without such evidence, the jury was left to guess, contrary to the advice of the court and binding Federal Circuit case law.
Apple also noted that, before the award was announced, the judge told the attorneys that he was “not sure that the number that appears in the verdict is what the jury intended to convey,” raising questions about whether the $5.7 billion figure was what the jury intended.
In a more prominent allegation, Apple argued that one of Taction’s key technical experts, Dr. Oliver, relied on “rigged” tests to support his findings of patent infringement.
In essence, the two Taction patents in question describe technology designed to produce consistent vibrations across different frequencies. Apple argues that its Taptic Engine works differently, producing stronger vibrations at certain frequencies than others.
The company continues to allege that Dr. Oliver developed a new test method specifically for the lawsuit, which measured how Apple’s electronic control system can control the vibrations of the Taptic Engine, rather than the underlying hardware that the patent claims.
From the document:
No reasonable juror could find that the “transducer output is high humidity” in the alleged product, as required by the construction court. Instead of evaluating high-moisture productivity using the test in the patent, Taction’s theory of infringement rested on a legally flawed test rigged by Dr. Oliver for this case. The only evidence of the actual output of the transducer, including pre-filing tests and violations of Taction, was presented by Apple and those tests showed a maximum response that Dr. Oliver admitted was not high humidity.
Finally, Apple argues that if Taction’s interpretation of its patents is accepted, the patent claims at issue themselves would be invalid. According to the company, the testing method used to establish infringement is contrary to the method described in the patent, making it impossible to clearly define what the patent covers.
For these reasons, Apple is asking the court to overturn the jury verdict, rule that Taction is entitled to no damages, and find that Apple did not infringe the patent (probably wrongly). Alternatively, the company is requesting a new trial covering infringement, patent, and damages.
With Apple’s appeal now pending, and the jury’s verdict still pending, the court will now consider whether to seize the $5.7 billion award, vacate the verdict, or order a new trial.
What’s your take on Apple’s argument? Let us know in the comments.
