Apple Inc.

This is an active litigation case filed against Apple Inc.

Piney Woods Mobility LLC filed a patent infringement case against Apple Inc.

A patent infringement lawsuit filed by Myw Semitech LLC against Apple Inc. in the Delaware District Court, asserting US patent 11894306. The case is currently active and ongoing.

This patent infringement suit was filed in the Western District of Texas and is currently ongoing, with a complaint for patent infringement having been filed.

This case was re-filed in the Western District of Texas by Avant Location Technologies LLC against Apple Inc. Apple Inc. has filed a motion to stay the case pending resolution of its related IPR petitions concerning the asserted patents.

Secure Communication Technologies, LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple Inc. concerning US patent 11334918 in the Eastern District of Texas.

The case is active with a trial date set for April 26, 2027. The parties are engaged in pretrial proceedings, including claim construction. This is part of a broader litigation campaign by Ingeniospec against technology companies.

MYW Semitech, LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against Apple Inc. in the Delaware District Court, asserting patent 11107768.

Longitude Licensing Limited and Marlin Semiconductor Limited filed an ITC investigation against multiple defendants, including Apple and TSMC, alleging infringement of a portfolio of semiconductor patents, including 8076194. The investigation is ongoing, with an evidentiary hearing scheduled.

LS Cable & System Ltd. alleges that Apple Inc. infringed on its patent related to wireless charging technology with products including iPhones, Apple Watches, and AirPods. LS Cable & System claims to have sent warnings to Apple since 2019 regarding the alleged infringement.

A district court case filed by Vampire Labs LLC against Apple Inc. in the Western District of Texas, asserting patent 8358103. The case was dismissed with prejudice due to a joint stipulation of dismissal, likely stemming from a confidential settlement.

CardWare Inc. asserted US patent 11176538, among other patents, covering NFC payment technology against Apple's products and platforms. The case closed due to a joint stipulation to transfer venue on March 25, 2025.

The complaint asserts six patents related to natural language processing against devices supporting the Siri virtual assistant. The case is currently active.

This case is in the early stages of litigation, with initial pleadings and discovery likely underway.

The complaint alleges that Apple's messaging services and devices, and Green Dot's technology, infringe upon seven patents, including U.S. Patent No. 11,653,183. The patents relate to a messaging system that can use either SMS or a packet switched message service. The plaintiff acquired the patents from Rembrandt IP Management, LLC.

Telcom Ventures LLC sued Apple Inc. alleging infringement of eight patents, including US12028793, through Apple Pay's mobile payments via biometric authentication and NFC. The case was initially filed in Florida and later transferred to California Northern District Court, resulting in its termination in this jurisdiction.

RFCyber Corp. appealed a decision regarding US patent 10600046 to the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the lower tribunal's unpatentability finding.

The lawsuit alleges that Apple's "Apple Pay" feature infringes on the patent's claims related to wireless data transmission for purchases.

The case is ongoing as of August 28, 2023, with a motion to transfer to the Northern District of California being considered.

Smart Mobile Technologies LLC sued Apple Inc. for patent infringement. The court granted Apple's motion to transfer venue, and the case was subsequently transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

A summary judgment of non-infringement was granted in favor of Apple. This decision was affirmed by the Federal Circuit in August 2023. While the '627 patent was asserted, the ruling was based on the construction of a claim term in other patents from the same family.

The district court granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Apple, a decision that was subsequently affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The district court granted summary judgment of non-infringement to Apple, a decision that was appealed by One-E-Way. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling on August 14, 2023, solidifying Apple's victory.

This is an active infringement lawsuit with a long history, including appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The litigation is ongoing at the district court level following decisions from the appellate court.

Optis sued Apple for infringement, leading to multiple trials and appeals. Initially, Optis won two jury verdicts for damages, but the Federal Circuit vacated both the infringement and damages judgments, remanding the case for a new trial.

Express Mobile, Inc. filed a patent infringement suit against Apple Inc. in the California Northern District Court. The case was ultimately dismissed.

Gigex, Inc. alleged that Apple's services for delivering online content and software updates infringed upon the methods described in US Patent 5,768,528. A joint stipulation of dismissal was filed, leading to the closure of the case, likely due to a settlement.

A jury awarded PMC over $308 million for Apple's infringement of the '091 patent. However, the district court judge overturned the verdict, finding the patent unenforceable due to prosecution laches, a decision later affirmed by the Federal Circuit.

Litigation initiated by Walker Digital, LLC, a patent assertion entity, against numerous major software companies. The case was resolved via dismissals with prejudice for various defendants throughout 2011 and 2012, suggesting settlements were reached.

A jury found Apple's iPod products infringed on two patents, including 6,199,076, and awarded Personal Audio $8 million in damages. The court subsequently ruled that this lump-sum award constituted a fully paid-up license for both past and future uses.

A jury found the patents-in-suit (which included US8112504) to be valid and infringed, awarding Personal Audio LLC $8 million in damages on July 8, 2011. The court also awarded prejudgment interest, totaling $12,182,331.

This case followed the pattern of the others initiated by the Marshall entities, alleging infringement of patent 6,164,534. It was concluded and dismissed, presumably after a settlement agreement was reached.

The complaint alleges that devices supporting the Siri virtual assistant infringe on six patents, including the '536 patent.

A long-running consolidated dispute that resulted in a $502.8 million judgment against Apple. However, following a PTAB decision invalidating the asserted patent claims, the Federal Circuit vacated the judgment and remanded the case with instructions for dismissal in March 2023.

This lawsuit alleged that Apple's products using the Apple Push Notification service infringed on Headwater's patents, including U.S. Patent No. 8,667,571. The case was settled and dismissed with prejudice 68 days after it was filed.

This is an active patent infringement lawsuit where the plaintiff alleges that the defendant's products or services, likely related to messaging applications, infringe on the claims of the '600 patent. The case is in its early stages.

The case has a scheduling order in place with various deadlines in late 2025 and 2026 for discovery and claim construction. Unified Patents data specifically links this case number in the Eastern District of Texas to litigation involving US8924192B1.

Telcom Ventures LLC filed a patent infringement suit against Apple Inc., originally in the Southern District of Florida (1:24-cv-23837) in 2024, which was later transferred to the Northern District of California (5:25-cv-05041) on June 13, 2025, where it remains active.

Cobblestone Wireless LLC sued Apple Inc. in the Western District of Texas for infringement of US Patent 7924802.

The Federal Circuit partially vacated and remanded the PTAB's decision, upholding 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i) for new/amended claims but ruling it does not apply to previously issued claims, affirming for amended claims and vacating for previously issued claims.

This is an active patent infringement case filed by Monticello Enterprises LLC against Apple Inc. in the Texas Western District Court, concerning US Patent 10,643,266.