Exclusive: Lindsey Graham was 'concerned' by Avanci patent pool

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Exclusive: Lindsey Graham was 'concerned' by Avanci patent pool

Lindsey Graham, former chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee

In a letter revealed to MIP, the former judiciary committee chair said he was concerned that the business review letter for the Avanci 5G pool 'was unnecessary'

Senator Lindsey Graham expressed concerns over the Avanci 5G patent pool in a letter to the Department of Justice shortly after the platform was launched in July 2020, it emerged this week as part of a freedom of information request made by Managing IP last year.

According to a letter sent to now-former attorney general William Barr and then-antitrust head Makan Delrahim, the now-ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee (and former committee chair) Graham said he was also concerned that the antitrust division’s actions “were unnecessary”.

“Given the issuance of a business review letter is entirely discretionary, I am concerned that the division’s actions here were unnecessary,” he said. “The division’s intervention may cause significant disruption in an already difficult time, negatively impacting the American economy, jobs, and innovation.”

Graham's letter was addressing the business review letter that the DoJ had published on July 28 2020 approving the Avanci 5G platform, a standard essential patent (SEP) licensing pool designed to bring together 5G patent owners and car makers. The pool was launched the day after, on July 29.

Related stories

The letter by Graham, sent a month later on August 17 and co-signed by fellow South Carolina senator Tim Scott, was issued in response to “substantial concerns from several large automotive suppliers and manufacturers in South Carolina”.

It cited a letter sent by the Alliance of Automotive Innovators on May 28, before the Avanci business review letter was issued, which said that DoJ support for the pool “would likely harm American competitiveness, innovation and job creation in the automotive sector”.

Graham's letter illustrates divisions between the top-ranking Republican in the judiciary committee, who has a big say on the development of intellectual property law in the Senate, and the former antitrust chief at the DoJ, Delrahim, on his IP and SEP policies as they affected the automotive industry. 

The matter of SEP licensing between 4G and 5G patent owners and car makers, and the Avanci 5G patent pool by extension, is a controversial one. There are several cases ongoing in the US and in Europe over end-point versus component-level licensing in the industry. 

In October 2020 Managing IP interviewed Delrahim (who stepped down in January), in which he said he was proud of the business review letters his department had issued, including those related to the Avanci 5G patent pool.

Drugs

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
The court ruled against the owner of the ‘Umbro’ mark, despite noting that post-sale confusion can be a legitimate ground for infringement
Shem Otanga discusses the importance of curiosity and passion, and why he would have loved to have been a professional recording artist
Practitioners say the Bombay High Court shouldn’t have refused well-known trademark recognition for TikTok simply because the app is banned in India
In-house counsel explain why firms should provide risk management advice that helps them achieve their goals
Attorneys at four firms explain the AI trends they expect in the future, including a potential shift in who plaintiffs sue for copyright infringement
The dispute at the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court pits Dryrobe against D-Robe and will include a ‘genericide’ element
Gift this article