Telcom Ventures LLC v. Apple Inc.

Telcom Ventures LLC, a principal investment firm specializing in venture capital and private equity in the wireless communications industry, is the plaintiff in this patent infringement lawsuit. The firm has been described in legal news as an "inventor-controlled plaintiff" and a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE), asserting patents as its primary business model. The defendant, Apple Inc., is a well-known American multinational technology company that designs, manufactures, and markets consumer electronics, software, and online services, including the accused Apple Pay service.

The core of the dispute centers on Apple Pay's mobile payment functionality, specifically its use of biometric authentication and near-field communication (NFC) for transactions. Telcom Ventures LLC alleges that this technology infringes eight of its patents. While all eight patents were asserted, US12028793 is among them, and it broadly relates to executing a financial transaction using a smartphone based on a "physiological parameter" and satisfying a "proximity condition."

The case, initially filed in the Florida Southern District Court (Case No. 1:24-cv-23837) on October 4, 2024, was subsequently transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on June 13, 2025, where it was assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-05041. In the Florida court, the case was presided over by District Judge Jose E. Martinez. Following the transfer, Judge Rita F. Lin was assigned to the case in the Northern District of California. The transfer of venue is a common procedural move in patent litigation, often sought by defendants like Apple to move cases to forums perceived as more convenient or less plaintiff-friendly. This case is notable due to Telcom Ventures' apparent pattern of asserting its patent portfolio against major players in the mobile payment industry, as evidenced by a similar lawsuit filed against Samsung alleging infringement of the same eight patents through Samsung Pay. Furthermore, the ongoing litigation in the Northern District of California is facing inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, with Apple Inc. having filed IPR2025-01235 against at least one of Telcom Ventures' patents (US 9,832,708, although not US12028793 specifically in this IPR), indicating a robust defense strategy that includes challenging patent validity at the USPTO.

Telcom Ventures LLC v. Apple Inc. - Key Legal Developments and Outcome

Overview

Telcom Ventures LLC initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple Inc. on October 4, 2024, in the Florida Southern District Court, alleging infringement of eight patents, including US12028793. The alleged infringement stemmed from Apple Pay's mobile payment functionalities, specifically those utilizing biometric authentication and Near Field Communication (NFC). The case was subsequently transferred to the Northern District of California and the patent US12028793 was later dismissed from the litigation.

Key Legal Developments

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings (Florida Southern District Court)

• Complaint Filed: Telcom Ventures LLC filed its complaint against Apple Inc. on October 4, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, case number 1:24-cv-23837. The lawsuit targeted Apple Pay's mobile payment services and iPhones that support these features, specifically involving biometric authentication and NFC. Alston & Bird LLP represented Telcom Ventures.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance (Florida Southern District Court)

• Motion to Dismiss: On June 12, 2025, Judge Jose E. Martinez denied without prejudice Apple's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim.
• Motion to Transfer Venue: Apple Inc. filed a motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). On June 13, 2025, the Florida Southern District Court granted Apple's motion to transfer.

3. Case Transfer and Termination (Florida Southern District Court)

• Case Transferred: The case was transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on June 13, 2025.
• Case Terminated in Florida: Following the transfer, the case in the Florida Southern District Court (1:24-cv-23837) was terminated on June 13, 2025. The new case number in the Northern District of California is 3:25-cv-05041.

4. Developments in the Northern District of California (3:25-cv-05041)

• Transferred Case Opened: The case was formally opened in the Northern District of California as 5:25-cv-05041 on June 13, 2025. Judge Rita F. Lin was assigned to the case.
• Initial Case Management: An Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines was filed on June 13, 2025. The Case Management Statement was due by September 10, 2025, and the Initial Case Management Conference was set for September 17, 2025.
• Partial Dismissal of Claims: On September 23, 2025, Telcom Ventures LLC filed a joint stipulation with a proposed order to dismiss Counts I, II, V, and VIII of its complaint for patent infringement. This included the dismissal of U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793 with prejudice from the litigation. Four related patents remained asserted in the litigation after this dismissal.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings

1. IPR by Apple Inc. (IPR2025-01239)

• Petition Filed: Apple Inc. filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793 (IPR2025-01239) with a filing date of August 5, 2025. This IPR was related to the patent asserted in the district court litigation.
• Motion to Dismiss IPR: Following the dismissal of U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793 with prejudice from the district court litigation on September 23, 2025, Apple Inc. filed a motion to dismiss its IPR petition (IPR2025-01239). The stated good cause for dismissal was to preserve the resources of the Board and the parties. The Board had not yet rendered a decision on institution for this IPR.

2. IPR by Google LLC (IPR2025-01401)

• Petition Filed: Google LLC filed an IPR petition against U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793B2 (IPR2025-01401) on August 8, 2025.
• Termination: This IPR was terminated on December 18, 2025, on the same date as its institution, indicating that the PTAB likely did not institute the review.

Final Disposition

The initial case in the Florida Southern District Court was terminated on June 13, 2025, due to its transfer to the Northern District of California. In the Northern District of California, on September 23, 2025, Telcom Ventures LLC dismissed U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793, along with several other patents, with prejudice from the litigation. This dismissal prompted Apple to move to dismiss its corresponding IPR petition for US12028793. While the overall litigation likely continued for the remaining asserted patents, the specific patent US12028793 was resolved by dismissal with prejudice from the district court and likely non-institution or dismissal of the related IPRs.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.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings (Florida Southern District Court)

• Complaint Filed (2024-10-04): Telcom Ventures LLC initiated the patent infringement lawsuit against Apple Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, case number 1:24-cv-23837. The complaint alleged infringement by Apple Pay's mobile payment services and iPhones incorporating biometric authentication and Near Field Communication (NFC). Telcom Ventures LLC was represented by Alston & Bird LLP.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance (Florida Southern District Court)

• Motion to Dismiss Denied (2025-06-12): The Florida Southern District Court, through Judge Jose E. Martinez, denied Apple's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim without prejudice.
• Motion to Transfer Venue Granted (2025-06-13): Apple Inc. filed a motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). This motion was granted by the Florida Southern District Court on June 13, 2025.

3. Case Transfer and Termination (Florida Southern District Court)

• Case Transferred (2025-06-13): The litigation was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
• Case Terminated in Florida (2025-06-13): Concurrently with the transfer, the case in the Florida Southern District Court (1:24-cv-23837) was officially terminated. The new case number in the Northern District of California is 3:25-cv-05041.

4. Developments in the Northern District of California (3:25-cv-05041)

• Case Opened (2025-06-13): The transferred case commenced in the Northern District of California under the new case number 5:25-cv-05041. Judge Rita F. Lin was assigned to preside over the case.
• Initial Case Management (2025-06-13): An Initial Case Management Scheduling Order was filed, setting deadlines including a Case Management Statement due by September 10, 2025, and an Initial Case Management Conference scheduled for September 17, 2025.
• Partial Dismissal of Claims (2025-09-23): Telcom Ventures LLC, the plaintiff, filed a joint stipulation for a proposed order to dismiss four counts of its patent infringement complaint (Counts I, II, V, and VIII). Notably, this included the dismissal of U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793 with prejudice from the litigation. Four other patents initially asserted in the lawsuit remained active in the litigation.

5. Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings

• Apple's IPR (IPR2025-01239): Apple Inc. filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition challenging U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793 (IPR2025-01239) on August 5, 2025, specifically targeting a patent asserted in the ongoing district court litigation. Following the dismissal of US12028793 with prejudice from the district court case on September 23, 2025, Apple Inc. moved to dismiss its IPR petition. The motion argued that dismissal would conserve resources, and at the time, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) had not yet decided on institution.
• Google's IPR (IPR2025-01401): Google LLC also filed an IPR petition against U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793B2 (IPR2025-01401) on August 8, 2025. This IPR was terminated on December 18, 2025, coinciding with its institution date, which typically suggests the PTAB did not institute the review.

6. Outcome
The specific patent at issue, US12028793, was dismissed with prejudice from the Telcom Ventures LLC v. Apple Inc. litigation in the Northern District of California on September 23, 2025. This dismissal led Apple Inc. to seek dismissal of its corresponding IPR (IPR2025-01239). A separate IPR against the same patent by Google LLC (IPR2025-01401) was also terminated without institution. While the broader litigation in the Northern District of California continued for other patents, the claims related to US12028793 were resolved through dismissal from the district court and the cessation of related IPR proceedings.

Limited press and analytical coverage has been identified specifically for the patent infringement lawsuit Telcom Ventures LLC v. Apple Inc., particularly from major legal or financial news outlets that typically provide in-depth analysis of high-stakes patent litigation. The available reporting primarily details the procedural aspects and basic facts of the case.

PatSnap reported on June 17, 2026, that Telcom Ventures LLC filed the suit against Apple in the Southern District of Florida in October 2024, asserting eight wireless and cellular connectivity patents, including US12028793, against iPhone models 5 through 15. The report highlighted the transfer of the case to the Northern District of California on June 13, 2025, after 252 days in the Florida court, following Judge Jose E. Martinez's grant of Apple's motion to transfer. This transfer was characterized as a "meaningful early victory for Apple" and a "strategic setback" for Telcom Ventures, as it moved the litigation to Apple's "home turf" where its engineering teams, source code, and key technical witnesses are located, and where the court has extensive familiarity with Apple's products. PatSnap noted that while the case closed in Florida, "none of the infringement allegations have been dismissed" at the time of the transfer, and the "merits remain fully unresolved".

RPX (via Mondaq) provided context in January 2025, noting that this lawsuit was Telcom Ventures' second, following an earlier complaint against Samsung alleging infringement of the same eight patents through Samsung Pay. This established Telcom Ventures as an "inventor-controlled plaintiff" asserting patents related to mobile payments via biometric authentication and near-field communication (NFC). While the initial complaint covered eight patents, court dockets for the Northern District of California (Case No. 5:25-cv-05041) indicate that on September 23, 2025, Telcom Ventures LLC filed a joint stipulation to dismiss several counts of its complaint, including the claims related to U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793, with prejudice.

The available coverage primarily focuses on the procedural developments, particularly the venue transfer, and the general nature of the claims against Apple Pay and iPhones. No specific details regarding damages sought or awarded, settlement terms, or broader market impact beyond the immediate procedural implications of the venue transfer have been reported by the identified news outlets for this particular litigation. The reporting does not delve into differing accounts or extensive analyst commentary on the case's significance or potential outcomes.

Sources

• patsnap.com
• mondaq.com
• rpxcorp.com
• justia.com

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record — Telcom Ventures LLC v. Apple Inc.

Telcom Ventures' representation was split between Alston & Bird LLP as national patent litigation counsel and Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson, P.A. as Florida local counsel. The Alston & Bird team entered pro hac vice in the Southern District of Florida (DE 9–12, granted DE 13–16; DE 35–36, granted DE 37–38), while Stearns Weaver attorneys signed the complaint and local filings. No in-house counsel appearance for Telcom Ventures was located.

National / lead counsel — Alston & Bird LLP

PTAB-only counsel (not district-court counsel of record): Christopher T.L. Douglas (Alston & Bird, Charlotte) is identified as Telcom Ventures' lead counsel in the parallel IPR proceedings, with Kirk T. Bradley and Emily Welch as back-up counsel. He should not be described as district-court counsel of record absent an appearance in the case docket.

Local counsel — Stearns Weaver Miller (Miami)

Key sourcing and docket anchors

• DE 1 (S.D. Fla., Oct. 4, 2024) — complaint, filed by Jay B. Shapiro of Stearns Weaver Miller.
• DE 9–12 (Oct. 8, 2024) — pro hac vice motions for Kirk T. Bradley, Mary I. Riolo, Theodore Stevenson III, and Karlee N. Wroblewski; granted DE 13–16 (Oct. 15, 2024).
• DE 35–36 (Dec. 20, 2024) — pro hac vice motions for Jacob W. Young and Katherine G. Rubschlager; granted DE 37–38 (Dec. 30, 2024). The motions identify Alston & Bird's Dallas and San Francisco offices.
• Docket/signature block listing Alston & Bird attorneys at Charlotte (Bradley, Wroblewski, Riolo), Dallas (Stevenson, Young), and San Francisco (Rubschlager): Docket Alarm, S.D. Fla. Doc. 48.
• Stearns Weaver signature block and local-counsel identification: Docket Alarm, S.D. Fla. Doc. 36.
• PTAB counsel identification: IPR2025-01419 Patent Owner Mandatory Notice.
• Party/attorney lists: UniCourt S.D. Fla. docket; UniCourt N.D. Cal. docket; Justia N.D. Cal. docket.

Contradiction flag — defendant's counsel section

The previously generated “Defendant representatives” section identifies Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Quinn Emanuel attorneys (including Theodore B. Olson, Mark A. Perry, Mark E. Lerner, Adam J. Wolfson, and Kevin P.B. Johnson). The public docket evidence does not support that. The S.D. Fla. docket shows Apple's counsel as John M. Desmarais, Cosmin Maier, Peter C. Magic, and Lindsey E. Miller of Desmarais LLP, together with Martin B. Goldberg and Lynnette Cortes Mhatre as Florida local counsel. The Gibson Dunn/Quinn Emanuel list should be treated as unverified and likely erroneous unless a later N.D. Cal. appearance confirms it.

Other discrepancies to note

• The existing summary uses both 3:25-cv-05041 and 5:25-cv-05041 for the N.D. Cal. case. CourtListener and UniCourt use 5:25-cv-05041-RFL (Judge Rita F. Lin); Justia's URL uses “3:2025cv05041.” The division prefix should be verified against PACER before being treated as settled.
• The “terminated 2025-06-13” date refers only to the Florida case upon transfer; it does not reflect termination of the N.D. Cal. litigation.

I'll research Apple's counsel of record directly against dockets and firm sources, since the prior section's Gibson Dunn/Quinn Emanuel list is flagged as unreliable.

Confirmed Desmarais LLP and Florida local counsel on the S.D. Fla. docket. Now let me pin down the N.D. Cal. appearances, the exact local-counsel firm name, and Apple's PTAB counsel.

Now let me verify the N.D. Cal. docket and Apple's PTAB counsel.

Defendant's Counsel of Record — Apple Inc.

Bottom line: Apple is represented by the patent boutique Desmarais LLP (New York, with a San Francisco office) as national/lead counsel, and by Lash & Goldberg LLP (Fort Lauderdale) as Florida local counsel. This directly contradicts — and should replace — the previously generated section naming Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Quinn Emanuel attorneys. No docket, opinion, or firm source I located places Theodore B. Olson, Mark A. Perry, Mark E. Lerner, Adam J. Wolfson, or Kevin P.B. Johnson on this case.

National / lead counsel — Desmarais LLP

Local counsel — Lash & Goldberg LLP

No in-house Apple counsel has appeared on either docket. No Gibson Dunn or Quinn Emanuel attorney appears anywhere in the S.D. Fla. docket or in the N.D. Cal. docket aggregations I could access.

Post-transfer posture in N.D. Cal. (5:25-cv-05041)

The transferred docket as captured in June 2025 (UniCourt, updated 6/14/2025) still listed only Goldberg and Mhatre as Apple's attorneys of record — normal after a § 1404(a) transfer, because Desmarais's pro hac vice admissions were Florida-specific and had to be re-sought in California. The subsequent N.D. Cal. filings show a substantially expanded Desmarais team. A signature block appearing in a N.D. Cal. docket document captioned Telcom Ventures LLC v. Apple, Inc. (CourtListener, cand.474095, Doc. 94-4) lists: John M. Desmarais (SBN 320875), Karim Z. Oussayef, Steven Balcof, Ido Sadeh, Atifah Safi (Washington, DC office), and Marie Delzell (SBN 367393, San Francisco). ⚠️ Caveat: I could not independently confirm that CourtListener document belongs to this case number rather than another Apple matter, so treat those post-transfer names (Oussayef, Balcof, Sadeh, Safi, Delzell) as provisional until verified against the PACER docket for 5:25-cv-05041.

PTAB counsel (separate from district-court counsel of record)

Apple filed a wave of IPR petitions against Telcom's patents on August 5, 2025 — IPR2025-01232 ('411), IPR2025-01233 ('708), IPR2025-01237, and IPR2025-01239 ('793, the patent at issue here). IPR2025-01239 was terminated December 8, 2025 on Apple's motion to dismiss the petition (DE 11), with a refund approved February 2, 2026