Apple Won't Get Rehearing in VirnetX Patent Infringement Battle Dating Back to 2010, Court Rules - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Apple Won't Get Rehearing in VirnetX Patent Infringement Battle Dating Back to 2010, Court Rules

Apple will not be able to get a rehearing in its ongoing patent battle with VirnetX to argue that the patents it is accused of infringing are invalid, reports Bloomberg.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today rejected Apple's request to reconsider a November ruling that confirmed Apple infringed on two VirnetX patents.

virnetx apple
The patent dispute between VirnetX and Apple dates back to 2010 when VirnetX accused Apple's FaceTime feature of infringing on its intellectual property, and there are multiple lawsuits involved.

In this particular case, VirnetX was awarded $502.6 million in April 2018 after a court ruled that Apple's ‌FaceTime‌, iMessage, and VPN on Demand features infringed on four VirnetX patents related to communications security.

An appeals court later reexamined the ruling and determined that Apple had infringed on two VirnetX patents, but the other two counts were reversed in November 2019 and the $502.6 million award was vacated. The case was sent back to a lower court to determine whether revised damages can be calculated or if there will be a new damages trial, but the ruling was ultimately in favor of VirnetX.

At this time, with Apple's request for a rehearing on patent validity denied, Apple and VirnetX are awaiting details on the new damages Apple will be required to pay.

In a separate case, Apple was ordered to pay $440 million to VirnetX for similar patent infringement issues. Apple appealed that ruling multiple times as well, but an appeals court in January 2019 ruled in VirnetX's favor, leaving Apple responsible for a $440 million patent infringement fee.

Popular Stories

iphone duo facetime

iPhone Duo's Hidden FaceTime Camera Takes 'Trash' Photos

Wednesday October 21, 2026 11:36 am PDT by
The iPhone Duo's inner screen has an under-display front camera that's largely hidden from view. It's the first time we've seen an under-display camera on an iPhone, and it turns out there's a reason Apple hasn't used the technology before. Apple said the camera offers 1080p video recording, but didn't mention photo quality. Gizmodo said it's a 4-megapixel camera and described the photos as...
iphone duo facetime

Why Can't iPhone Duo Users Make Eye Contact on FaceTime?

Monday October 26, 2026 3:49 pm PDT by
FaceTime's Eye Contact setting is missing on the iPhone Duo, MacRumors can confirm. The setting was first flagged as absent by MacRumors forum member TwoBytes, who noticed their eyes looking "a little off" during a call. Introduced in iOS 14, Eye Contact uses machine learning to subtly adjust your eyes during a video call to make it seem like you're looking into the camera lens, even though ...
Taptic Engine iPhone 6s

Apple Could Owe Even More After $5.7 Billion Patent Verdict

Tuesday October 20, 2026 8:24 pm PDT by
Apple could face additional payments on top of a $5.7 billion patent verdict, with Taction Technology asking a federal judge for more damages, interest, and royalties on future iPhone and Apple Watch sales. The request follows a September jury verdict that Apple's Taptic Engine infringed two Taction patents covering haptic feedback, the technology that produces taps and vibrations in...

Top Rated Comments

oneMadRssn Avatar
88 months ago
I wish there was a way to get patents on obvious ideas invalidated.
There is. It's called Inter Partes Review ("IPR"). It's a process much cheaper than litigation that allows anyone to ask a special board at the USPTO to take a second look at a patent. Historically, that process has resulted in roughly 75% of patents they look at to be found invalid. Patent owners call them the patent death squad, while defendants usually hail them as cleaning up the system.

Apple tried to IPR these patents and did not succeed. If the patent death squad didn't rule them to be obvious, that should tell you how non-obvious they are.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
88 months ago

This is how a rotten patent system works: patent trolls will win every single time.
"every single time" seems like an exaggeration to me. And like I've told my kids a million times, never exaggerate.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
sw1tcher Avatar
88 months ago

Is it guaranteed that they're a patent troll?
Ruling not in Apple's favor? Patent troll.

That's how it works around here.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ruslan120 Avatar
88 months ago
Is it guaranteed that they're a patent troll? Inventing new IP and then selling it off or licensing is a valid form of business, especially for colleges and universities.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
I7guy Avatar
88 months ago
Pay up and let’s get on with life.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
88 months ago

There is. It's called Inter Partes Review ("IPR"). It's a process much cheaper than litigation that allows anyone to ask a special board at the USPTO to take a second look at a patent. Historically, that process has resulted in roughly 75% of patents they look at to be found invalid. Patent owners call them the patent death squad, while defendants usually hail them as cleaning up the system.

Apple tried to IPR these patents and did not succeed. If the patent death squad didn't rule them to be obvious, that should tell you how non-obvious they are.
The PTAB did rule that the patents at issue (i.e. relevant claims of those patents) were invalid. It did so not based on them being obvious, but based on them being anticipated by prior art (i.e. Takahiro Kiuchi - The Development of a Secure, Closed HTTP-Based Network on the Internet (1996)).

There were 4 patents which Apple was, in this case, found to have infringed - '211, '504, '135, and '151. The PTAB instituted an IPR against each of those patents. That means that the Board found that there was a reasonable likelihood that the petitioners (Black Swamp for '211 and '504, Mangrove Partners for '135 and '151) would be able to demonstrate invalidity for some of the claims at issue.

The Federal Circuit found that Apple hadn't infringed '211 and '504 - i.e., it found that Apple was entitled to JMOL on the infringement issue because no reasonable jury could, using proper claim constructions, find that Apple infringed the asserted claims of those patents. But, for the record, the PTAB found many claims of those patents invalid as anticipated by Kiuchi.

Regarding '135 and '151, the PTAB also found that the asserted claims from those patents (2 from '135 and 1 from '151) - as well as most of the other claims of those patents - were invalid as anticipated by Kiuchi. The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded those decisions for a number of reasons that I won't get lost in.

However, among other issues, the Federal Circuit left it for the PTAB to consider the obviousness issue with regard to both patents. The PTAB hadn't previously needed to decide on obviousness because it had found anticipation. The Federal Circuit also left it for the PTAB to reconsider the anticipation issue with regard to '135. The PTAB heard arguments in these matters a few weeks ago.

So we don't know whether the claims at issue will ultimately be found, through IPR, to be invalid. But the point is that there's at least some reasonable arguments to be made that they are invalid.

To be clear, that most likely (barring an unlikely review by the Supreme Court) won't help Apple when it comes to the case which is the subject of this thread. Apple hasn't been allowed to make the invalidity arguments that it wanted to because of previous litigation, involving the same patents, between the parties. So even if VirnetX's asserted claims (from '135 and '151) are ultimately invalidated through the IPR process, Apple will likely have to pay damages based on having infringed them. What's left now is to determine how much Apple will have to pay.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Latest Stories
macOS 27.3 Brings Live Activities to Macs Without Dynamic Island
macOS 27.3 Brings Live Activities to Macs Without Dynamic Island
1 hour ago
Apple TV Reportedly Planning 'Silo' Spinoff
Apple TV Reportedly Planning 'Silo' Spinoff
2 hours ago
Is It Worth Buying a Titanium Apple Watch?
Is It Worth Buying a Titanium Apple Watch?
2 hours ago
macOS 27.3 Includes an Important Security Fix
macOS 27.3 Includes an Important Security Fix
2 hours ago
Massive Sale Hits Apple Watch Ultra 3 With Record Low $250 Discounts
Massive Sale Hits Apple Watch Ultra 3 With Record Low $250 Discounts
4 hours ago
Does HomePod Mini 2 Have Improved Sound? Here's What Reviews Say
Does HomePod Mini 2 Have Improved Sound? Here's What Reviews Say
4 hours ago
macOS 27.3 Makes Markdown Files Easier to Read
macOS 27.3 Makes Markdown Files Easier to Read
4 hours ago
HomeView Pre-Order Returns to $289.99 on Amazon
HomeView Pre-Order Returns to $289.99 on Amazon
5 hours ago
Apple May Phase Out Non-Touch High-End MacBook Pros
Apple May Phase Out Non-Touch High-End MacBook Pros
5 hours ago
Apple's Insider Trading Policy Now Covers Prediction Markets
Apple's Insider Trading Policy Now Covers Prediction Markets
6 hours ago
'Stick' Season 2 Premieres Today on Apple TV
'Stick' Season 2 Premieres Today on Apple TV
6 hours ago
iPhone 18e Rumored to Focus on Chip Upgrade With Few Major Changes
iPhone 18e Rumored to Focus on Chip Upgrade With Few Major Changes
6 hours ago
Google Maps Updated to Fully Support iPhone Duo Displays
Google Maps Updated to Fully Support iPhone Duo Displays
6 hours ago
Everything New in the iOS 27.3 Beta
Everything New in the iOS 27.3 Beta
18 hours ago
Apple Music's New Selfie Sing Feature Lets You Record Karaoke Videos
Apple Music's New Selfie Sing Feature Lets You Record Karaoke Videos
19 hours ago
iPhone Jailbreak Gets Past Lockdown Mode and Survives an Update
iPhone Jailbreak Gets Past Lockdown Mode and Survives an Update
21 hours ago
iPadOS 27.3 Expands Siri Mode to Camera App
iPadOS 27.3 Expands Siri Mode to Camera App
22 hours ago
Veterans Day Apple Watch Activity Challenge Launches November 11
Veterans Day Apple Watch Activity Challenge Launches November 11
23 hours ago
Best Early Black Friday Mac Deals: Save Hundreds on MacBook Air, Mac Mini, and More
Best Early Black Friday Mac Deals: Save Hundreds on MacBook Air, Mac Mini, and More
23 hours ago
Apple Fitness+ Gets Gym Strength Plans in iOS 27.3
Apple Fitness+ Gets Gym Strength Plans in iOS 27.3
23 hours ago
iOS 27.3 Adding New StandBy Mode Features to iPhone 11 and Newer
iOS 27.3 Adding New StandBy Mode Features to iPhone 11 and Newer
23 hours ago
Apple Releases New AirPods Beta Firmware
Apple Releases New AirPods Beta Firmware
23 hours ago
iOS 27.3 Beta Brings Apple Intelligence to China
iOS 27.3 Beta Brings Apple Intelligence to China
23 hours ago
iPhone Duo Gets Reachability in iOS 27.3 Beta
iPhone Duo Gets Reachability in iOS 27.3 Beta
1 day ago
Siri AI Gets More Capable in iOS 27.3
Siri AI Gets More Capable in iOS 27.3
1 day ago
iOS 27.3 Adds Vertical Tabs and Adaptive Dark Mode to Safari
iOS 27.3 Adds Vertical Tabs and Adaptive Dark Mode to Safari
1 day ago
watchOS 27.3 Brings Live Rewind and Siri Recap to Apple Watch
watchOS 27.3 Brings Live Rewind and Siri Recap to Apple Watch
1 day ago
iOS 27.3 Beta Brings Back Apple's Redesigned Health App
iOS 27.3 Beta Brings Back Apple's Redesigned Health App
1 day ago
Apple Releases First macOS Golden Gate 27.3 Beta
Apple Releases First macOS Golden Gate 27.3 Beta
1 day ago
Apple Seeds First iOS 27.3 Beta
Apple Seeds First iOS 27.3 Beta
1 day ago