Top Defense Results: GPNE Corp. v. Apple Inc.

A San Jose federal jury in October rejected a $94 million patent infringement lawsuit against Apple Inc. over wireless data communication technology dating back to the pager era.

Hawaii-based GNPE Corp., a patent holding company, claimed that some versions of Apple's iPhones and iPads infringed two data transmission patents. The company sought a $1 royalty for each allegedly infringing iPhone and iPad sold.

In a pretrial order, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh limited how Apple's attorneys could describe GNPE during trial. The company had argued in motions that the term "patent troll" was derogatory and pejorative.

Among the terms Koh deemed off limits were "patent troll," "bounty hunter," "bandit" and "a corporate shell." Still, the company's attorneys criticized the plaintiff using more polite language.

During the two-week trial, Apple's lead counsel Ruffin Cordell of Fish & Richardson PC described GNPE as a company that "doesn't make anything" and "doesn't sell anything." He argued that Apple's iPhones and iPads didn't infringe GPNE's patents because they only cover mobile communication technology from pagers.

The attorney also contended during opening statements that seeking $94 million for two patents is "extreme."

Cordell declined to comment.

While the jury cleared Apple of infringement, it still found the two communication patents to be valid. They were "continuation patents" issued in 2009 and 2010 that date back to a patent filing in the early 1990s. GPNE Corp. v. Apple Inc., CV12-2885 (N.D. Cal., filed June 8, 2012).

"It was a hard-fought case in which our firm was hired just a few months before trial," said plaintiff's attorney Kalpana Srinivasan, a Susman Godfrey LLP partner, in a statement. "We strongly believe the court will address the underlying legal issues in post-verdict motions, which are still pending."

- Kylie Reynolds