Apple's $1.1 Billion Patent Dispute With Caltech Granted New Damages Trial

Apple and its supplier Broadcom today convinced a U.S. appeals court to reject a jury verdict that required them to pay $1.1 billion for infringing on Wi-Fi patents that belong to the California Institute of Technology (via Reuters).

Apple Logo Cash Feature Yellow
In 2016, Caltech accused Apple and Broadcom of infringing on its patents related to the Wi-Fi technology used in many Apple devices. Caltech's patents, granted between 2006 and 2012, are highly technical and relate to IRA/LDPC codes that utilize simpler encoding and decoding circuitry for improved data transmission rates and performance. The technologies are implemented in both the 802.11n and 802.11ac Wi-Fi standards used by many Apple products.

In the court filing with the U.S. District Court for Central California, Caltech accused Apple of selling various iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch models, along with other Wi-Fi products, that incorporate these IRA/LDPC encoders and/or decoders and thereby infringe upon four of Caltech's patents. Broadcom, as one of Apple's main suppliers of Wi-Fi chips, was also named in the complaint. At the time, Apple used Broadcom chips in the Apple Watch, ‌iPhone‌, and ‌iPad‌, as well as the MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and iMac.

In 2020, a jury verdict ordered Apple and Broadcom to collectively pay Caltech a fine of $1.1 billion for the patent infringements. Apple was ordered to pay $838 million, while Broadcom was ordered to pay $270 million. Apple hoped to invalidate one of the patent claims, but this was subsequently declined by the U.S. Court of Appeals.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today declared that the $1.1 billion award, which is one of the largest in U.S. history for a patent dispute, was not justified and ordered a new trial. The new damages trial will only reconsider Caltech's awarded sum, rather than revisiting the patent infringement itself.

Popular Stories

iPhone 17 Pro and Air Feature

Two iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone Air Colors Appear to Scratch More Easily

Friday September 19, 2025 10:02 am PDT by
As reported by Bloomberg today, some of the new iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone Air models on display at Apple Stores today are already scratched and scuffed. French blog Consomac also reported on this topic. The scratches appear to be most prominent on models with darker finishes, including the iPhone 17 Pro and Pro Max in Deep Blue, and the iPhone Air in Space Black. Images Credit: Consoma ...
iOS 26

iOS 26.0.1 Coming Soon, Likely With iPhone Air and iPhone 17 Pro Fix

Thursday September 18, 2025 9:17 am PDT by
Apple is preparing to release iOS 26.0.1, according to a private account on X with a proven track record of sharing information about future iOS versions. The update will have a build number of 23A350, or similar, the account said. It is likely that iOS 26.0.1 will fix a camera-related bug on the new iPhone Air and iPhone 17 Pro models. In his iPhone Air review, CNN Underscored's Henry T. ...
iPhone 17 Pro Colors

iPhone 17 Pro Max Teardown Reveals Qualcomm's Snapdragon X80 Modem for 5G

Friday September 19, 2025 7:39 am PDT by
While the iPhone Air is equipped with Apple's custom C1X modem for cellular connectivity, all of the iPhone 17 models are outfitted with Qualcomm modems still. A teardown video shared on Chinese platform Bilibili today (via Reddit) appears to confirm the iPhone 17 Pro Max is equipped with Qualcomm's Snapdragon X80 modem in particular. The same modem is likely used in the iPhone 17 and iPhone ...
iphone 17 pro max techwoven

Here Are The Best Cases You Can Buy for Your New iPhone 17 and iPhone Air

Friday September 19, 2025 6:46 am PDT by
Apple's new iPhones launch today, and there are plenty of options to choose from when it comes to protecting your new device from drops and scratches. In this article, we're taking a look at some of the best options for iPhone 17, iPhone 17 Pro, and iPhone 17 Air cases, as well as a few charging accessories. Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with some of these vendors. When you click a...
iOS 26 on Three iPhones

iOS 26's Liquid Glass Design Draws Criticism From Users

Wednesday September 17, 2025 2:56 pm PDT by
It's been two days since iOS 26 was released, and Apple's new Liquid Glass design is even more divisive than expected. Any major design change can create controversy as people get used to the new look, but the MacRumors forums, Reddit, Apple Support Communities, and social media sites seem to feature more criticism than praise as people discuss the update. Complaints There are a long...
iphone 17 pro inside

iPhone 17 Teardowns Confirm SIM and eSIM-Only Battery Capacities

Friday September 19, 2025 8:39 am PDT by
YouTube channel REWA Technology today shared an iPhone 17 Pro teardown video, offering a closer look inside the model with a SIM card tray. We are still waiting for repair website iFixit to share a more comprehensive teardown of the latest iPhone models, but this video provides a good look in the meantime. The device features various internal design changes, including larger rear camera...

Top Rated Comments

TEG Avatar
47 months ago

Good, Apple stealing tech should be punished. I wonder how Apple would feel if you used their technologies without being asked? Prepare to get homeless‘d.
It is part of the 802.11 standards. If anything the IEEE should be the one in hot water, not Apple or Broadcom.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ACHD Avatar
47 months ago

If it is part of a standard, the patents should no longer be enforceable, or any fees are paid by use of the standard.
It becomes part of the FRAND system where everyone basically pays the same fees.

In this case apple refused to pay the FRAND prices and this is something apple does often.
They refused to PAY for a PART that already has been made with the FRAND pricing built in.

APple basically took the tech, the design of others and copied it. Apple Was approached and notified and REFUSED to pay the FRAND price.

FRAND pricing is where a patent becomes unavoidable and MUST be made available to ANYONE at a fair price that anyone can or is willing to pay.

Apple did not sue and say the FRAND price was to much just that they didn't want to pay it. to date no one has really sued these owners of the patent for being TO EXPESNIVE which you can do with FRAND patents since they must be affordable and available to the publics.


This was apple being cheap
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Mitochris Avatar
47 months ago
Were these patents under some open license agrement? I have a problem with universities making major money out of their work. They get tax benefits, get government funding or money via donations that are tax deductible. Their work should benefit all, as it is sponsored by all. If it was a minimal fee then ok, but the 1Billion sound like a major patent dispute.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
bollman Avatar
47 months ago

You are assuming Apple is at fault. My question is that if the technology is part of a recognized industry standard and is built into Broadcoms chips, how is it that just Apple is violating the patents?
Apple has deep pockets. Makes them an easy target for stuff like this. Even if Caltech gets $100m, then they still win. That’s prob the budget of multiple departments there.
Both Apple and Broadcom where found at fault.
Broadcom decided that they do not want to pay for the license since they have no "product" that uses the patent, so the license costs are passed down to whoever buys the Broadcom chips and uses them in a product.
Apple thought that was a dumb idea and decided not to pay the license as Apple decided Broadcom should do it, and Broadcom insisted Apple should do it.
And here we are, neither paid the license, and both got sued by CALTECH.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
TEG Avatar
47 months ago
If it is part of a standard, the patents should no longer be enforceable, or any fees are paid by use of the standard.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
cmaier Avatar
47 months ago
This is one news article I am not permitted to discuss :-)
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)