Apple Saves $300 Million After Appeals Court Win in LTE Patent Fight

Apple today won a victory in its ongoing patent infringement litigation with Texas-based patent troll Optis, reports Reuters.

iphone 16 pro purple
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today threw out a prior jury verdict that would have forced Apple to pay $300 million for infringing on standard-essential LTE patents owned by Optis.

When appealing the initial ruling from the Eastern District Court of Texas, Apple argued that the court had not fairly separated the different patent claims that it allegedly violated, and only asked the jurors to determine if Apple violated any patents. The federal appeals court agreed with Apple, and said that the district court ruling provided incorrect jury instructions and violated Apple's Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial on each patent infringement claim.

Apple and Optis will now return to court for another jury trial in the Eastern District of Texas. In a statement, Optis said it believes it will ultimately receive fair compensation from the court.

We remain highly confident the Court will establish fair compensation for the critical Optis patents that enable high-speed connectivity for millions of Apple devices. Nothing in this decision challenges the fundamental facts, which demonstrate that Apple is infringing Optis patents and permit a new trial on damages. No patents were found to be invalid by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The legal fight between Apple and Optis kicked off in 2019, when Optis claimed that Apple violated LTE patents owned by Optis. Optis was initially awarded $506 million in a 2020 trial, but after appeal, the damages were thrown out because Optis is required to license standard-essential patents under fair and reasonable terms and $506 million did not meet that obligation.

The $300 million award that was thrown out today was the result of a second jury trial in 2021 that also found in Optis' favor. As a patent holding company, Optis does not manufacture products, instead going after tech companies that may violate the patent portfolio that it owns.

Optis also filed infringement claims against Apple in the UK, and in May 2025, Apple was ordered to pay $502 million plus interest after it was found to have violated Optis' UK wireless patents. Apple is also appealing that ruling.

Popular Stories

iOS 26

15 New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 26.2

Friday December 5, 2025 9:40 am PST by
Apple is about to release iOS 26.2, the second major point update for iPhones since iOS 26 was rolled out in September, and there are at least 15 notable changes and improvements worth checking out. We've rounded them up below. Apple is expected to roll out iOS 26.2 to compatible devices sometime between December 8 and December 16. When the update drops, you can check Apple's servers for the ...
Intel Inside iPhone Feature

Apple's Return to Intel Rumored to Extend to iPhone

Friday December 5, 2025 10:08 am PST by
Intel is expected to begin supplying some Mac and iPad chips in a few years, and the latest rumor claims the partnership might extend to the iPhone. In a research note with investment firm GF Securities this week, obtained by MacRumors, analyst Jeff Pu said he and his colleagues "now expect" Intel to reach a supply deal with Apple for at least some non-pro iPhone chips starting in 2028....
ive and altman

Jony Ive's OpenAI Device Barred From Using 'io' Name

Friday December 5, 2025 6:22 am PST by
A U.S. appeals court has upheld a temporary restraining order that prevents OpenAI and Jony Ive's new hardware venture from using the name "io" for products similar to those planned by AI audio startup iyO, Bloomberg Law reports. iyO sued OpenAI earlier this year after the latter announced its partnership with Ive's new firm, arguing that OpenAI's planned "io" branding was too close to its...
iPhone 17 Pro Cosmic Orange

10 Reasons to Wait for Next Year's iPhone 18 Pro

Monday December 1, 2025 2:40 am PST by
Apple's iPhone development roadmap runs several years into the future and the company is continually working with suppliers on several successive iPhone models at the same time, which is why we often get rumored features months ahead of launch. The iPhone 18 series is no different, and we already have a good idea of what to expect for the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max. One thing worth...
Photos App Icon Liquid Glass

John Gruber Shares Scathing Commentary About Apple's Departing Software Design Chief

Thursday December 4, 2025 9:30 am PST by
In a statement shared with Bloomberg on Wednesday, Apple confirmed that its software design chief Alan Dye will be leaving. Apple said Dye will be succeeded by Stephen Lemay, who has been a software designer at the company since 1999. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that Dye will lead a new creative studio within the company's AR/VR division Reality Labs. On his blog Daring Fireball,...
maxresdefault

iPhone Fold: Launch, Pricing, and What to Expect From Apple's Foldable

Monday December 1, 2025 3:00 am PST by
Apple is expected to launch a new foldable iPhone next year, based on multiple rumors and credible sources. The long-awaited device has been rumored for years now, but signs increasingly suggest that 2026 could indeed be the year that Apple releases its first foldable device. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. Below, we've collated an updated set of key details that ...
Apple John Ternus 2019

Will John Ternus Really Be Apple's Next CEO?

Friday December 5, 2025 9:01 am PST by
There is uncertainty about Apple's head of hardware engineering John Ternus succeeding Tim Cook as CEO, The Information reports. Some former Apple executives apparently hope that a new "dark-horse" candidate will emerge. Ternus is considered to be the most likely candidate to succeed Cook as CEO. The report notes that he is more likely to become CEO than software head chief Craig Federighi, ...
ios 18 to ios 26 upgrade

Apple Pushes iPhone Users Still on iOS 18 to Upgrade to iOS 26

Tuesday December 2, 2025 11:09 am PST by
Apple is encouraging iPhone users who are still running iOS 18 to upgrade to iOS 26 by making the iOS 26 software upgrade option more prominent. Since iOS 26 launched in September, it has been displayed as an optional upgrade at the bottom of the Software Update interface in the Settings app. iOS 18 has been the default operating system option, and users running iOS 18 have seen iOS 18...
iOS 26

Apple Seeds iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2 Release Candidates to Developers and Public Beta Testers

Wednesday December 3, 2025 10:33 am PST by
Apple today seeded the release candidate versions of upcoming iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2 updates to developers and public beta testers, with the software coming two weeks after Apple seeded the third betas. The release candidates represent the final versions of iOS 26.2 and iPadOS 26.2 that will be provided to the public if no further bugs are found during this final week of testing....
Johny Srouji

Apple Chip Chief Johny Srouji Could Be Next to Go as Exodus Continues

Sunday December 7, 2025 10:41 am PST by
Apple's senior vice president of hardware technologies Johny Srouji could be the next leading executive to leave the company amid an alarming exodus of leading employees, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reports. Srouji apparently recently told CEO Tim Cook that he is "seriously considering leaving" in the near future. He intends to join another company if he departs. Srouji leads Apple's chip design ...

Top Rated Comments

surferfb Avatar
25 weeks ago

What about Optis makes you think they're a troll?

- The lawsuit is clearly not just a nuisance suit asking for cost-of-litigation settlement. The economics are clearly based on real value of the patented contributions to the LTE standard.
- The patents came out of LG, Panasonic, and Samsung. These are real bona-fide innovators that contributed real bona-fide innovations to LTE.
- The patents survived numerous validity challenges at both the district court and the (notoriously defendant-friendly) PTAB. Apple spent millions trying to invalidate them and failed. It is beyond dispute now that the patents are good and valid.
- To get to trial, the suit had to survive several offramps and narrowing. Rule 11, motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgement, claim construction, motions for judgement as a matter of law, etc. To get this far, a plaintiff has to run the table on every issue. But a defendant has to only win one issue to wipe it all away.

All of this is not proof that Optis is right and deserves $500M. Rather, it is evidence that Optis is not merely just a troll.
Optis doesn't invent anything but instead buys up patents with the specific intent to file lawsuits against companies they allege to be infringing them.

They're trolls.
Score: 19 Votes (Like | Disagree)
alecgold Avatar
25 weeks ago
Ugh patent trolls. I do understand the need and usefulness of patents, and the subsequent protection on them. And I do understand that you can’t always (directly) use a patent. But these trolls have made a business model out of filing as many useless patents without any intent of ever developing a useful product or service and the start litigating everybody into oblivion.
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Mousse Avatar
25 weeks ago

What about Optis makes you think they're a troll?
They don't make anything. That carries a lot of weight in how I decide whether an entity is a patent troll or not. Having an idea is good, but going after others because they made that idea a reality? Come on, man.

As a patent holding company, Optis does not manufacture products, instead going after tech companies that may violate the patent portfolio that it owns.
Anyhow, I agree with the court's decision to overturn.

When appealing the initial ruling from the Eastern District Court of Texas, Apple argued that the court had not fairly separated the different patent claims that it allegedly violated, and only asked the jurors to determine if Apple violated any patents. The federal appeals court agreed with Apple, and said that the district court ruling provided incorrect jury instructions and violated Apple's Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial on each patent infringement claim.
Not surprising it's the Eastern District Court of Texas. Patent trolls love suing there because that court usually finds in favor of the patent trolls.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
DelayedGratificationGene Avatar
25 weeks ago
Man how do patent trolls live with themselves? They are the bottom of the barrel
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
surferfb Avatar
25 weeks ago

First, Optis' specific intent is to license. Optis presented plenty of evidence that Apple refused to pay even FRAND rates. If an infringer sandbags you for years, what else are you to do? It is Apple that forced Optis into a lawsuit, not the other way around.
You just defined a patent troll. They buy patents just to extract money from people actually making things.


Second, all of you are applying an overly broad view of what a troll is.
- Is University of Wisconsin a troll because they own a lot of patents, don't make anything, and often litigate to get license fees? Under your definitions, almost all universities and research hospitals are patent trolls.
- What about independent R&D labs, such as Wilus in South Korea? They don't make anything, but they spend a ton on R&D and contribute real innovations that make cellular and wifi better, license their tech to implementors, and sue when implementors refuse to pay.
No, they are the ones developing the inventions, not buying patents from actual inventors so they can sue.


The other issue with such a broad view of trolls is it totally screws the inventors. There is nothing wrong with getting paid and selling your inventions. In Optis' case, LG, Panasonic, and Samsung do make real products and spent real money on R&D to develop that LTE tech. But each of LG, Panasonic, or Samsung have their legitimate reasons for not wanting to engage in the business of licensing. I don't blame them; licensing is risky and a distraction. Why is it so wrong to take the sure thing (whatever the market is willing to pay today) and let someone else do the licensing stuff?
It’s not wrong to sell or license patents, but I’d argue it is wrong to buy and weaponize them solely for litigation, which is what Optis does.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
kwikdeth Avatar
25 weeks ago

First, Optis' specific intent is to license. Optis presented plenty of evidence that Apple refused to pay even FRAND rates. If an infringer sandbags you for years, what else are you to do? It is Apple that forced Optis into a lawsuit, not the other way around.

Second, all of you are applying an overly broad view of what a troll is.
- Is University of Wisconsin a troll because they own a lot of patents, don't make anything, and often litigate to get license fees? Under your definitions, almost all universities and research hospitals are patent trolls.
- What about independent R&D labs, such as Wilus in South Korea? They don't make anything, but they spend a ton on R&D and contribute real innovations that make cellular and wifi better, license their tech to implementors, and sue when implementors refuse to pay.

The other issue with such a broad view of trolls is it totally screws the inventors. There is nothing wrong with getting paid and selling your inventions. In Optis' case, LG, Panasonic, and Samsung do make real products and spent real money on R&D to develop that LTE tech. But each of LG, Panasonic, or Samsung have their legitimate reasons for not wanting to engage in the business of licensing. I don't blame them; licensing is risky and a distraction. Why is it so wrong to take the sure thing (whatever the market is willing to pay today) and let someone else do the licensing stuff?
The key differentiator you are deliberately glazing over is that in all your other cited examples, they are the originators of the patents, and not a third party that purchased them and then used them as basis for litigation.
Anyway, found the Optis PR guy. Figures they'd deploy the forum version of their trolls to sway opinion.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)