Jury Finds Infringement in IPhone 5S Processor

MADISON, Wis. (CN) - As its latest crop of iPhones faces identical patent scrutiny, a federal jury has found Apple's last batch violated a patent held by scientists at the University of Wisconsin.

The jury found Monday that the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, the system's patent administrator, proved six claims that Apple's processors were too similar to those developed by university researchers.

The jury must now decide how much Apple owes the foundation in damages for its infringing A7 processor, used in the iPhone 5S, the iPad Air, and iPad Mini.

This past month, the foundation filed a nearly identical complaint to the one the jury decided, claiming infringement of the same patent on the new A9 and A9X processors in the iPhone 6S, iPhone 6S Plus, and iPad Pro. Apple has yet to file an answer to the latest complaint.

According to both complaints, the patent titled "Table-Based Data Speculation Circuit for Parallel Processing Computer" was issued to Andreas Moshovos, Scott Breach, Terani Vijaykumar, and Gurindar Sohi in 1998 as a result of their "labor and ingenuity."

"The invention disclosed and claimed in the patent has been recognized by those in the art as a major milestone in the field of computer microprocessing," the complaints state.

Apple asserted in the first lawsuit that the patent was invalid because they referenced "prior art," an exception under U.S. law that prevents the issue of patents on information or technology described in a public place or a separate patent application prior to filing.

During the first lawsuit, Apple requested review by the U.S. Patent Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the second complaint states.

"In a highly substantive, 27-page decision, the board made express findings denying institution of the inter partes review for all claims, concluding that Apple did not show a reasonable likelihood that any claim of the patent would be found invalid," the second complaint says, noting that the board also denied Apple's request for a rehearing.

Rachel Tulley, a representative of Apple, left a voicemail Wednesday declining to comment. Representatives for the foundation have not returned a request for comment.

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit