Plaintiff
77 cases as plaintiff.
Apple Inc., commonly known as Apple, is a publicly traded technology company founded in 1976 by Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, and Ronald Wayne. Headquartered in Cupertino, California, the company is a major player in consumer electronics, software, and online services. Apple trades on the NASDAQ stock exchange under the ticker symbol AAPL. As of late 2025, the company reported having approximately 166,000 full-time employees, and for the fiscal year ended September 2025, its annual revenue was approximately $416.2 billion.
Apple is an operating company that designs, manufactures, and markets a wide range of consumer technology products and services. Its major product lines include the iPhone smartphone, the iPad tablet computer, the Mac line of personal computers, the Apple Watch smartwatch, and AirPods wireless earbuds. The company also operates a significant services division, which includes the App Store, iCloud, Apple Music, Apple TV+, and Apple Pay. Apple's business model is characterized by a tightly integrated ecosystem of hardware, software, and services.
The provided data shows Apple is predominantly a defendant in patent litigation, with nine out of ten tracked cases filed against the company. This pattern is typical for a large operating company that is a frequent target for patent infringement claims, often from non-practicing entities (NPEs). The lawsuits have been filed in several jurisdictions, including the plaintiff-friendly Western and Eastern Districts of Texas, as well as the District of Delaware and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
The single case where Apple is the plaintiff is a PTAB action against Topwire LLC, likely a defensive response to a district court lawsuit filed by Topwire against Apple a few months earlier. The list of plaintiffs suing Apple includes several LLCs, such as Topwire LLC, Ingeniospec, LLC, VB Assets, LLC, and Monticello Enterprises LLC. These types of entities are frequently utilized as patent assertion vehicles. The cases span several years, reflecting a continuous stream of litigation targeting Apple's high-revenue products.
Watchlist
Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when Apple Inc. files another patent-infringement lawsuit. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.
In response to an infringement suit, Apple Inc. filed a petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR) with the PTAB, seeking to invalidate the claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,859,202. The proceeding is currently pending.
An Inter Partes Review (IPR) initiated by Apple Inc. and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd. against MYW Semitech LLC before the PTAB, challenging US patent 11894306, which has been instituted.
Apple Inc. filed this Inter Partes Review against Avant Location Technologies LLC before the PTAB, challenging US Patent 9042910. An institution decision is expected by March 2026.
Apple Inc. initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding against MYPORT TECHNOLOGIES Inc. regarding US Patent 9832017. The PTAB issued a discretionary denial of institution for this IPR.
Apple Inc. filed an inter partes review (IPR) challenging US Patent 10237067, owned by MYPORT TECHNOLOGIES Inc. The IPR was not instituted due to a procedural discretionary denial.
An inter partes review initiated by Apple Inc. against Vampire Labs LLC concerning patent 8358103 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which was terminated as settled.
Apple Inc. filed an inter partes review (IPR) against CardWare Inc. for US patent 11176538, which was not instituted due to procedural reasons.
Apple Inc. filed an inter partes review challenging claims of the '058 patent as obvious over combinations of prior art references. The PTAB proceeding was instituted and pending.
Apple Inc. petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1-20 of US 9,049,188 B1. The PTAB instituted review, and the proceeding remained active as of April 2026, with a Petitioner Reply filed March 23, 2026.
Inter partes review of U.S. 8,886,954 filed by Apple Inc. Reported status: final written decision.
Inter partes review of U.S. 8,886,954 filed by Google LLC (caption also names Apple Inc.). Instituted July 24, 2024; Google terminated on settlement Feb. 5, 2025; listed as a final written decision. It is among the originating PTAB cases in Proxense's Federal Circuit appeal.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of all claims 1-22 of US 10,438,196. The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision on May 23, 2024, finding no challenged claims unpatentable.
Apple petitioned for IPR challenging all claims of the '654 patent, and Google LLC joined as a party. The Board issued a Final Written Decision on July 2, 2024, finding claims 1-19 unpatentable as obvious, and the decision was appealed to the Federal Circuit.
IPR instituted on Apple's petition with Google joining, challenging claims 1-20 of the '868 patent. The PTAB found all challenged claims obvious, and the Federal Circuit affirmed.
Apple's inter partes review petition challenging claims 46–51, 53, 54, 58, 59, 64, and 67 of the '319 patent. The PTAB held all challenged claims unpatentable.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. 10,971,140 claims 1-8. The Board instituted on 2023-06-12 and issued a final written decision on 2024-06-11 finding none of claims 1-8 unpatentable; Apple appealed to the Federal Circuit as 24-2208.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 10,062,377. The PTAB instituted review on June 12, 2023, issued a Final Written Decision on June 11, 2024, and the decision was appealed.
Inter partes review petition filed by Apple Inc. challenging claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, and 14-16 of U.S. Patent No. 7,979,277. The PTAB instituted review on June 12, 2023, and issued a final written decision on June 11, 2024.
IPR challenging all claims 1-21 of the '190 patent. The Board issued a decision on settlement prior to institution of trial on March 6, 2023 and terminated the proceeding after a joint motion to terminate.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1-3 and 5 of U.S. Patent 9,319,075. The Board issued a Final Written Decision on September 25, 2024, determining no challenged claim unpatentable. Real parties in interest included Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics entities; Apple appealed.
Inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,019,946 B1. The Board found claims 14, 15, 17–21, and 26–30 unpatentable; claims 1–13 and 16 were not shown unpatentable. A Feb. 13, 2024 errata corrected the disposition to include claim 26 among the unpatentable claims and to list claims 1–13 and 16 as surviving.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of the '785 patent owned by Mozido, Inc. (now Fintiv, Inc.). The PTAB instituted on all challenged claims 1-21 and issued a Final Written Decision on January 2, 2024, finding some challenged claims unpatentable; Director Review was denied on February 22, 2024, and the decision was appealed.
Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. filed an inter partes review petition against Smart Mobile Technologies LLC directed at U.S. Patent No. 8,761,739. The PTAB instituted review on December 5, 2022, issued a Final Written Decision, and an IPR certificate issued on January 5, 2024.
Apple, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. petitioned for inter partes review of US 9,049,119 B2. The Board issued a final written decision on Nov. 28, 2023, finding all challenged claims unpatentable as obvious, and an IPR certificate issued on Feb. 15, 2024.
Apple and Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. 8,472,937. The PTAB instituted on all grounds and issued a Final Written Decision on December 4, 2023, holding all challenged claims unpatentable; an IPR certificate issued April 1, 2024.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of the '705 patent; institution was denied on December 6, 2022, and Google Patents metadata lists the status as settlement.
Apple Inc. petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. 9,756,168, with Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. identified as real parties in interest. The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision on October 23, 2023, holding the challenged claims unpatentable as obvious.
Inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,442,501 B1. The Board instituted review on Sept. 29, 2022, and issued a Final Written Decision on Sept. 26, 2023, holding claims 1–3, 5, 6, 10, 13, and 16–18 unpatentable. Smart Mobile did not appeal; an inter partes review certificate (kind code K1) issued Jan. 2, 2024, confirming cancellation.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Apple Inc. petitioned for inter partes review of US 8,824,434. The PTAB instituted review on Oct. 26, 2022, and issued a final written decision on Oct. 23, 2023 holding claims 1-8 unpatentable as obvious.
Apple Inc. challenged the patentability of US8472936 before the PTAB. The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision, which was appealed. The Federal Circuit later reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded, concluding the Board was precluded from finding certain claims of US8472936 patentable due to issue preclusion with claims from related patents 8761739 and 8442501 previously found unpatentable in other IPRs.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of US 10,517,484. Institution was granted on Aug. 6, 2021; the first final written decision on Aug. 3, 2022 found claims 1, 2, 7, and 15-23 unpatentable and claims 3-6 and 8-14 not shown unpatentable. On remand after Fed. Cir. No. 23-1034, the Feb. 14, 2025 final written decision held all challenged claims 1-23 unpatentable.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1–4 of the '086 patent. The proceeding was terminated before institution based on a joint motion following settlement in April 2021.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. Patent 7,203,517. The proceeding was terminated by settlement prior to institution.
Apple filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging the patent. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board declined to institute the review.
Apple filed an inter partes review of U.S. Patent 7,076,431 against Parus. The PTAB issued a final written decision on Sept. 9, 2021.
Apple Inc. petitioned for inter partes review of the '084 patent. Final written decision recorded as 'No Claims Unpatentable' per RPX Insight, with a caveat that exact claim-by-claim disposition needs verification.
Apple filed an Inter Partes Review challenging the validity of patent 8411557, but the PTAB denied institution, thereby affirming the patent's validity.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review in a proceeding identified as associated with U.S. Patent No. 6,430,498. The PTAB did not institute the IPR.
Apple Inc. petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 6,580,999. The Board did not institute the IPR, and the proceeding was resolved in connection with the parties' global settlement.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1, 6, and 7 of the '193 patent. The Board exercised discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) and denied institution based on the advanced parallel Eastern District of Texas litigation.
Apple Inc. filed an inter partes review petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 6,928,306. The Board instituted review and then terminated the proceeding as settled on April 20, 2021, noting the parallel E.D. Tex. case had been dismissed.
Apple challenged claims 1-3 and 5-14 of U.S. 6,329,794; the PTAB instituted on June 19, 2020, and terminated the proceeding on April 20, 2021 due to settlement.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. Patent 10,084,991. The Board instituted review but terminated the proceeding on April 20, 2021 based on the parties' settlement, without a final written decision.
Apple Inc. filed an inter partes review petition against Maxell, Ltd. challenging claims of U.S. 10,212,586. The Board instituted review on July 15, 2020, but terminated the proceeding on April 20, 2021 due to settlement without reaching the merits.
Apple filed an inter partes review petition challenging U.S. Patent 9,757,040. The Board did not institute the review on the merits.
Apple filed a declaratory judgment action against FISI in N.D. Cal. Related FISI campaign case; narrative notes '319 was not independently confirmed as pleaded.
Apple filed an inter partes review petition against Qualcomm; the narrative reports it as indexed under US 9,552,633 but could not confirm whether it targets the '633 patent specifically versus a related Qualcomm patent. The Board dismissed and terminated the proceeding before institution on May 1, 2019, following the global settlement.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of claims 1, 2, and 5-7 of the '674 patent. The Board's final written decision held those claims unpatentable, but the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded, and later reversed the Board; an IPR certificate issued September 25, 2025.
Inter partes review petition by Apple against Qualcomm challenging U.S. 7,693,002; a Final Written Decision issued and the proceeding terminated January 6, 2020, with an IPR certificate for U.S. 7,693,002 issued September 20, 2021.
Apple petitioned for IPR of the '433 patent, challenging claims 1-6 and 8. The Board found Apple did not prove those claims unpatentable, construed 'instant voice messaging application' as client-based, denied rehearing, and Apple noticed an appeal.
Inter partes reexamination of US 8,051,181 with Apple Inc. as third-party requester. VirnetX appealed to the Federal Circuit (No. 16-1480), which affirmed the PTAB's invalidity findings on Dec. 9, 2016.
On remand from the Federal Circuit, the ITC conducted Phase 1 of the remand in Inv. No. 337-TA-750. The investigation was terminated on June 16, 2014, with no violation of Section 337 and no exclusion order.
Apple Inc. filed an IPR petition against Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute concerning U.S. Patent 7,177,798. Institution was denied on June 12, 2014.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of the '697 patent. The PTAB instituted review and issued a final written decision on 2015-05-11 finding claims 1–11, 14–25, and 28–30 unpatentable over Wesinger (US 5,898,830) and RFC 2543 (SIP). This was the alternative ground.
Apple antitrust/FRAND action concerning the ADC-acquired U.S. 7,672,219 and 7,417,944, filed in E.D. Va. and transferred to D. Del.; resolved by the November 2012 global settlement.
Apple asserted the '915 patent and other Apple patents against HTC in the District of Delaware. The court stayed the case pending ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-797 under 28 U.S.C. § 1659. It was later dismissed following the global Apple–HTC settlement.
ITC Section 337 investigation brought by Apple against Samsung; D504889 appears among the Apple IP rights identified in the investigation record and was also cited by Samsung as prior art against other Apple rights. The Commission's Aug. 2013 final determination is reported to have found a violation on iPhone-related design and utility patents, but D504889's specific disposition is unverified.
Apple asserted US 7,663,607 against Samsung, but withdrew it in July 2012 before trial. The case was tried on other Apple patents, including the '381 bounce-back, '915 multi-touch/pinch-to-zoom, and '163 double-tap-to-zoom patents, and resulted in a jury verdict and subsequent appeals.
'828 was among the patents in suit and was expressly included in the court's claim-construction order (Dkt. 849, construing '711, '002, '381, '607, '828, '915, '891) and in Apple's Patent L.R. 4-5 submissions. It was not among the utility patents tried to the August 2012 jury verdict and produced no infringement verdict.
Apple filed a Section 337 complaint against Motorola asserting US 7,812,828, US 7,663,607, and US 5,379,430. The ALJ found literal infringement of the asserted '607 claims but held them invalid; the Commission affirmed invalidity under §103 and terminated the investigation with no violation.
Inter partes review proceedings where the PTAB found several claims of U.S. Patent 6,502,135 to be unpatentable. This decision was subsequently appealed by VirnetX.
Apple Inc. filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging the validity of US 11,991,600. The PTAB has not yet decided whether to institute a trial. The outcome could significantly impact the related district court litigation.
The Board instituted Inter Partes Review on October 15, 2024. This IPR challenges claims 1-4 of the '337 patent.
This ex parte reexamination, requested by Apple and Motorola Mobility, was stayed pending an IPR, then reopened. SoftView LLC subsequently amended claims, which were initially deemed patentable over prior art.
Apple Inc. challenged the validity of Zentian Ltd.'s US Patent 10839789 before the CAFC, arguing its claims were obvious over US Patent 5819222 and US Patent 6832194. The CAFC vacated and remanded a PTAB decision that had previously favored Zentian Ltd., indicating errors in the PTAB's claim interpretation in light of prior art.
Apple Inc. filed an IPR related to the 9,769,314 family; Google Patents litigation metadata lists this case against the '314 patent. The proceeding is marked settled per that metadata.
Apple filed a copy of Google's petition and a motion for joinder in an inter partes review of US 9,679,289. Joinder was granted with IPR2024-00783, and a final written decision was reached.
Federal Circuit appeal involving the '533 patent. US 9,995,722 not confirmed as asserted.
Apple appealed the standing/ownership issue, arguing Dr. Islam's University of Michigan employment agreement automatically assigned the patents to UM. The Federal Circuit affirmed that Omni had standing because there was no present assignment. The '286 patent was expressly identified as one of the asserted patents in this dispute.
Apple's Federal Circuit mandamus petition arising from Eastern District of Texas case 2:19-cv-00025, seeking transfer or stay. It was voluntarily dismissed on March 26, 2020, after the underlying case was resolved and dismissed.
Apple appealed to the Federal Circuit. The court deconsolidated 2023-2396 from 2023-2418, dismissed Apple's 2023-2396 under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), and withdrew Apple from 2023-2418. The disposition was procedural only, with no validity finding.
Apple petitioned for inter partes review of claims 5 and 6 of U.S. 8,339,493. The PTAB did not institute the petition for procedural reasons.
Federal Circuit appeals from PTAB final written decisions concerning the '946 patent (and the '653 patent). The court affirmed the PTAB's determination that Apple failed to prove claims 1–13 and 16 of the '946 patent unpatentable, but vacated and remanded on Smart Mobile's cross-appeal regarding claim 17 due to inadequate motivation-to-combine analysis under the APA. Related/proximate dockets include 24-1607 and 24-1623.
Apple Inc. filed a declaratory judgment action against Headwater Research LLC in the Northern District of California, asserting U.S. Patents 9,232,403; 9,491,564; and 8,639,935. The action was terminated November 3, 2025 via stipulated dismissal. U.S. 8,745,191 was not listed among the asserted patents.
Apple filed an anticipatory declaratory judgment action over 12 patents. The court denied FISI's motion to dismiss/transfer.
Apple filed a declaratory judgment action of non-infringement against FISI in N.D. Cal., arguing use of its proprietary Lightning signaling. The action was related to FISI's E.D. Tex. action against Apple.
Apple appealed the ITC's determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-750. The Federal Circuit affirmed anticipation of '607 claims 1–7, reversed anticipation of claim 10, vacated the obviousness ruling for failure to weigh objective evidence, and reversed and remanded the '828 claim construction.