Which tech company is best positioned to win Apple’s $1.9 billion patent war?
In a landmark case, a federal appeals court in California ruled that Apple can’t sue for patent infringement by its own software, even if it can sue Apple for the same kind of infringement by the software of competitors.
In an opinion released on Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the appellate court that hears appeals of the nation’s patent laws, sided with Apple and said the company is in the right to demand payment from the companies that developed its software.
The ruling follows a federal court in Oregon last year that rejected Apple’s request for a $1 billion patent infringement award in a patent infringement case.
The court rejected the $1,500 payment Apple had demanded, saying that it was too small and that it did not adequately protect Apple’s interests.
Apple’s lawsuit against the software companies in the Oregon case had sought more than $4 billion in damages.
The Oregon lawsuit also accused Apple of violating antitrust laws by buying a software company that is based in the same area as a competitor.
In a statement on Thursday afternoon, Apple said it was “extremely disappointed” with the ruling.
“We will continue to fight against patent trolls and other companies who are trying to steal our ideas and undermine innovation,” Apple said.
The federal appeals panel ruled that antitrust law prohibits companies from seeking a patent or patent licensing arrangement that would allow them to extract financial and other penalties from an alleged infringer, and that such arrangements violate antitrust laws.
Apple was also required to pay royalties and to provide the software firms with the means to prevent patent infringement.
In its decision, the appeals panel said the plaintiffs’ claims of patent infringement and the alleged violations of antitrust law “are too vague to provide meaningful relief.”
It said Apple did not meet the standard required by antitrust law to prove that the alleged infringers were not only seeking “monetary compensation” but that they were not merely “aggressively pursuing patent infringement.”
It also said Apple’s allegations of patent infringements by a number of its own patents did not satisfy the bar set by the federal courts to prove an “aggravated” infringement.
Apple had previously asked the U,S.
Supreme Court to review the case.
It was unclear what the outcome of the appeals will mean for Apple’s pending bid to buy Google.
Apple has a patent portfolio that includes patents related to Siri, Apple Pay and other products.
The U.K. government is trying to get the technology company to sell its patents, arguing that the company’s patents infringe on Microsoft’s technology.
Apple in April asked a U.N. panel of experts to review how Microsoft is enforcing its patents on a worldwide basis, arguing the company did not do enough to protect the technology.
Microsoft said in a statement that it would not comment on pending litigation.
Apple and Microsoft’s dispute over patents dates to 2007, when Microsoft was a leading software provider and Apple was a small player.
In November, Apple filed a $5 billion patent lawsuit against Microsoft alleging that the technology giant had copied and patented its ideas.
Microsoft responded by filing a $3 billion lawsuit against Apple, arguing Apple had violated a key U.s. patent law.
A settlement was reached in 2014, but it has not yet been finalized.
The parties have since reached a series of high-profile settlement agreements that include the release of a series