The US District Court for the Northern District of California denies motion for summary judgment that a company’s standard essential patent licensing practices breached its FRAND obligations (ASUS / InterDigital)

This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards.

In a decision published in redacted form, Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the Northern District of California denied ASUSTek Computer Inc.’s and ASUS Computer International’s (collectively, ASUS’s) motion for summary judgment that InterDigital, Inc.’s (InterDigital’s) standard essential patent (SEP) licensing practices breached its FRAND obligations. The court also granted-in-part and denied-in-part InterDigital’s motion for summary judgment, rejecting a request to dismiss ASUS’s Sherman Antitrust Act claim but granting summary judgment as to issues relating to judicial and promissory estoppel and as to a California competition law claim. ASUS Computer Int’l v. InterDigital, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-01716-BLF, ECF No. 367 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2018). In 2008, ASUS and InterDigital entered into a

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Authors

  • Hogan Lovells (Washington)
  • Hogan Lovells (Washington)
  • Baker McKenzie (Washington D.C.)
  • Hogan Lovells (Washington)

Quotation

Joseph Raffetto, Nicholas Rotz, Daniel Graulich, Logan M. Breed, The US District Court for the Northern District of California denies motion for summary judgment that a company’s standard essential patent licensing practices breached its FRAND obligations (ASUS / InterDigital), 20 December 2018, e-Competitions December 2018, Art. N° 96681

Visites 32

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues