All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 Managing IP is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

Apple v HTC: the lawsuits left behind

This week’s settlement between HTC and Apple means an end to at least 10 unresolved lawsuits across three countries involving around 39 patents and 21 firms. Here is a look at some of the patents the Apple-HTC agreement will cover, and the myriad firms representing the two companies

In the UK, there were two trials scheduled in lawsuits brought by HTC against Apple. The first was set for November 19 and was due to last four days in which HTC sought the revocation of Apple’s EP (UK) 2126678 patent (relating to bounce back).

A 20-day trial was due to begin on November 11 2013 and related to four more UK European patents: 0769169, 0719487, 0664021 and 0760131.


Earlier this year, HTC applied to have Apple’s 2964022, 2059868 and 1168859 patents revoked. Apple sued HTC for infringing these patents and patent 2098948. HTC counterclaimed to have the ‘948 patent revoked. Mr Justice Floyd ruled that some of the claims were invalid and that one of the patents had not been infringed. Apple appealed to have some of the Court’s finding overturned. Following the settlement, HTC has withdrawn from the appeal. This is still due to be heard in March 2013, but it is likely that the UK IPO will appear to give its view given HTC’s decision not to take part.

Simon Ayrton at Powell Gilbert and a team of barristers from 8 New Square were advising HTC. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and barristers from 11 South Square were acting for Apple.

Courts in Germany have heard, and were due to hear, a series of nullity, opposition and infringement actions between HTC and Apple. These related to the German equivalents of the five Apple patents due to be litigated in London next week and in November 2013, and to four more German EP patents.

In addition, there was litigation over two patents owned by HTC’s subsidiary SG3, over EP (DE) 1066600 and EP (DE) 1034505.

HTC was being advised in Germany by Peter Kather of Preu Bohlig. Apple was represented by a legal team led by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.

In the US, there were three pending ITC investigations involving a total of 16 patents and two remaining suits in the US District Court for the District of Delaware involving nine of Apple’s patents.


The firms representing Apple in the Delaware case included Morris James, Kirkland & Ellis and Wong Cabello Lutsch Rutherford & Brucculeri. A Paul Hastings attorney was terminated from the case. HTC was represented by Shaw Keller, Perkins Coie and Keker & Van Nest; Young Conaway Stargattt & Taylor, Benesch Friedlander Coplan & Aronoff and Richards Layton & Finger attorneys were terminated along the way.

At the ITC, two of the investigations were filed by Apple and one by HTC. DLA Piper, Kirkland & Ellis, Adduci Mastriani & Schaumberg and Fish & Richardson were acting for Apple; Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, Foster Murphy Altman & Nickel and Finnegan were representing HTC.

Below is a list of most of the patents at issue in the combined cases. Twenty-five are Apple’s and 10 are HTC’s.


Apple patents


US 7,844,915

US 7,469,381

US 7,084,859

US 7,920,129

US 5,481,721

US 5,946,647

US 6,275,983

US 6,343,263


US 7362331

US 7479949

US 7657849

US 5920726

US 7633076

US 5848105

US 7383453

US 5455599

US 6424354

High Court of England and Wales

EP 0769169

EP 0719487

EP 0664021

EP 0760131

EP 2964022

EP 2059868

EP 1168859

EP 2098948

HTC patents


US 7,765,414

US 7,417,944

US 7,672,219

US 6,708,214

US 6,473,006

US 7,289,772

US 6,868,283

US 7,020,849

High Court of England and Wales

EP (DE) 1066600

EP (DE) 1034505

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The current system for resolving SEP disputes is stuck, but the Unified Patent Court could tilt the balance before any amicable solution is found
The executive director lost a key vote at a meeting of the EUIPO management and budget committee on Tuesday, November 22
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Law firms’ reliance on billable hours is hampering diversity and wellbeing, suggests INTA, but both sides of the profession must club together to enact change
In his first interview in the role, Klaus Grabinski outlines how the UPC will deal with outstanding issues such as potential conflicts and problems with the CMS
Daniel Chew speaks to Managing IP about his plans for the coming year and how UK attorneys can seize the day at the UPC
It’s easy for lawyers to drag their clients to court, but settling disputes amicably could often be a win-win scenario for everyone
Qualcomm’s vice president and legal counsel, John Scott, reflects on the rise of litigation finance and what he wants in private practice lawyers
Klaus Grabinski addressed the controversy over part-time UPC judges in an exclusive interview with Managing IP
Counsel at four US law firms say forming relationships, sending legal updates and demonstrating data have helped them snag a lot of work