LITIGATION AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS | LITIGATION AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS COURT PROCEEDINGS Lenovo UK Proceeding On August 27, 2019, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries filed a claim in the UK High Court against Lenovo Group Limited and certain of its subsidiaries. The claim, as amended, alleges infringement of five of the Company's patents relating to 3G and/or 4G/LTE standards: European Patent (U.K.) Nos. 2,363,008; 2,421,318; 2,485,558; 2,557,714; and 3,355,537. The UK High Court held case management conferences on October 6, 2020 and December 16, 2020, a disclosure hearing on January 19, 2021 and pre-trial review hearings for the first trial on January 28, 2021 and February 8, 2021. At those hearings, the UK High Court entered a schedule for the technical and non-technical FRAND proceedings. Two technical trials were scheduled for March 2021 and June 2021 and the non-technical FRAND trial is scheduled in January 2022. There are three additional technical trials scheduled for the remaining patents following the FRAND trial. The first and second technical trials were completed, and on July 29, 2021, the UK High Court issued its decision regarding the first technical trial finding European Patent (UK) No. 2 485 558 valid, infringed, and essential to Release 8 of LTE. The Company is awaiting the court’s decision regarding the merits of the second technical trial. District of Delaware Patent Proceeding On August 28, 2019, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the "Delaware District Court") against Lenovo Holding Company, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries alleging that Lenovo infringes eight of InterDigital's U.S. patents—U.S. Patent Nos. 8,085,665; 8,199,726; 8,427,954; 8,619,747; 8,675,612; 8,797,873; 9,203,580; and 9,456,449—by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling Lenovo wireless devices with 3G and/or 4G LTE capabilities. As relief, InterDigital is seeking: (a) a declaration that InterDigital is not in breach of its relevant FRAND commitments with respect to Lenovo; (b) to the extent Lenovo does not agree to negotiate a worldwide patent license, does not agree to enter into binding international arbitration to set the terms of a FRAND license, and does not agree to be bound by the FRAND terms to be set by the UK High Court in the separately filed UK proceedings described above, an injunction prohibiting Lenovo from continued infringement; (c) damages, including enhanced damages for willful infringement and supplemental damages; and (d) attorneys’ fees and costs. On September 16, 2020, the Delaware District Court entered a schedule for the case, setting a patent jury trial for December 5, 2022. On March 8, 2021, the Delaware District Court held a claim construction hearing, and the court issued its order on May 10, 2021 construing various disputed terms. On March 24, 2021, the Delaware District Court consolidated the antitrust proceeding discussed below with this patent proceeding. District of Delaware Antitrust Proceeding On April 9, 2020, Lenovo (United States) Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC filed a complaint in the Delaware District Court against the Company and certain of its subsidiaries. The complaint alleges that the Company defendants have violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act in connection with, among other things, their licensing of 3G and 4G standards essential patents ("SEPs"). The complaint further alleges that the Company defendants have violated their commitment to the ETSI with respect to the licensing of 3G and 4G SEPs on FRAND terms and conditions. The complaint seeks, among other things (i) rulings that the Company defendants have violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and are liable for breach of their ETSI FRAND commitments, (ii) a judgment that the plaintiffs are entitled to a license with respect to the Company's 3G and 4G SEPs on FRAND terms and conditions, and (iii) injunctions against any demand for allegedly excessive royalties or enforcement of the Company defendants' 3G and 4G U.S. SEPs against the plaintiffs or their customers via patent infringement proceedings. On June 22, 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss Lenovo's Sherman Act claims with prejudice, and to dismiss Lenovo's breach of contract claim with leave to re-file as a counterclaim in the Company's legal proceeding against Lenovo in the Delaware District Court discussed above. Oral argument on the Company's motion to dismiss was held on October 27, 2020. On March 24, 2021, the Delaware District Court ruled on the Company’s motion to dismiss. The Delaware District Court dismissed the Sherman Act Section 1 claim without prejudice, denied the motion to dismiss the Sherman Act Section 2 claim, and consolidated the Section 2 and breach of contract claims with Company’s patent proceeding against Lenovo in the Delaware District Court discussed above. China Proceeding On April 10, 2020, Lenovo (Beijing) Ltd. and certain of its affiliates filed a complaint against the Company and certain of its subsidiaries in the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (Beijing IP Court) seeking a determination of the FRAND royalty rates payable for the Company's Chinese 3G, 4G and 5G SEPs. On February 20, 2021, the Company filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the Beijing IP Court to take up Lenovo’s complaint. The jurisdictional challenge remains pending. Xiaomi As a result of the license agreement between the Company and a subsidiary of Xiaomi Corporation ("Xiaomi"), the parties have ceased all activity in each of the ongoing disputes, described below, other than to seek temporary stays in each pending proceeding. At the end of each stay period, the parties will take all action required to withdraw and/or terminate all legal proceedings between the parties. China Proceeding On August 5, 2020, the Company was informed in writing by Xiaomi that, on June 3, 2020, Xiaomi Communication Technology Co., Ltd. and certain of its affiliates filed a complaint against the Company and one of its subsidiaries in the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court (the "Wuhan Court") seeking for the Wuhan Court to determine a global FRAND rate for a license to the Company's 3G and/or 4G/LTE SEPs. The Company was informed on September 25, 2020 that the Wuhan Court held an ex parte hearing on or about September 23, 2020 and issued an order that, among other things, enjoins the Company from seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction against Xiaomi and certain of its subsidiaries for infringement of certain of the Company's patents related to 3G and/or 4G/LTE standards in the Company's case in the Delhi High Court discussed below, or elsewhere. The Wuhan Court ordered a fine of up to one million yuan per day if the Company were to violate the order. The Company maintains that it has not yet been properly served with Xiaomi's complaint or the Wuhan Court's anti-suit injunction order. On October 13, 2020, the Company filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the Wuhan Court to take up Xiaomi’s complaint. On March 12, 2021, the Company’s Chinese counsel was orally informed by the Court that the Company’s application challenging jurisdiction of the Wuhan Court had been rejected. Although the Wuhan Court did not issue a written decision, the Company challenged the Court’s rejection at the IP Tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (“SPC”). The Company was informed by the Wuhan Court that the Hubei High Court purportedly received a letter response from the SPC on May 17, 2021 regarding our application and forwarded it to the Wuhan Court. The Wuhan Court has interpreted the letter as a denial of our application challenging jurisdiction. The Company requested a copy of the letter but that request was denied. On September 30, 2020, the Company filed a preliminary conditional response seeking reconsideration of the Wuhan Court's anti-suit injunction. In a decision dated December 4, 2020, the Wuhan Court dismissed the Company’s reconsideration petition. The Company challenged that decision at the SPC, but that challenge was denied. The Wuhan Court held two evidentiary hearings in April and June 2021. On July 29, 2021, the Wuhan Court held the first of multiple substantive hearings during which the parties presented their respective claims, defenses and evidence. India Proceeding On July 29, 2020, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries filed two patent infringement actions in the Delhi High Court in New Delhi, India (the "Delhi High Court") against Xiaomi and certain of its subsidiaries. The first complaint alleges infringement of five of the Company's patents related to 3G and/or 4G/LTE standards: Indian Patent Nos. 262910; 295912; 298719; 313036; and 320182. The second complaint alleges infringement of three of the Company's patents related to H.265/HEVC standards: Indian Patent Nos. 242248; 299448; and 308108. In these proceedings, the Company is seeking compensatory and punitive damages for Xiaomi's infringement of the asserted patents. The Company is further seeking, among other remedies, interim and permanent injunctive relief to prevent further infringement of the litigated patents in India, unless Xiaomi elects to take a license on terms determined to be FRAND by the Delhi High Court. The Company’s application for interim injunctive relief remains pending. On September 29, 2020, the Company filed an anti-anti-suit injunction application against Xiaomi in the Delhi High Court, seeking, among other things, to enjoin Xiaomi from enforcing the Wuhan Court's September 23, 2020 anti-suit injunction order described above. On October 9, 2020, the Delhi High Court granted the Company's motion and issued an ad interim injunction restraining Xiaomi from enforcing the anti-suit injunction order issued by the Wuhan Court, pending further consideration of the Company's application for an anti-anti-suit injunction at a hearing on November 25, 2020. On May 3, 2021, the interim anti-anti-suit injunction was made permanent throughout the pendency of the Indian cellular case. Furthermore, the Delhi High Court stated that, if any orders or other measures are passed by the Wuhan Court related to the anti-suit injunction that result in the Company incurring a monetary penalty, then Xiaomi must deposit a corresponding, equal amount with the Delhi High Court for the Company's benefit within one week. On June 4, 2021, Xiaomi filed responses to the two complaints (cellular and H.265/HEVC), which included counterclaims seeking invalidation of the patents in the respective suits. The Company filed replies in support of the two complaints and in response to the counterclaims on July 5, 2021. German Proceeding On October 30, 2020, the Company filed an anti-anti-suit injunction application against Xiaomi in the Munich District Court, seeking to enjoin Xiaomi from continuing to pursue the Wuhan Court's September 23, 2020 anti-suit injunction order described above with respect to Germany. On November 11, 2020, the Munich District Court granted the Company's motion and issued an ex parte injunction restraining Xiaomi from enforcing the anti-suit injunction. The Company filed penalty requests for non-compliance with said court order, which were granted, and which Xiaomi has appealed. Xiaomi opposed the injunction and requested a stay of enforcement, and an oral hearing was held on January 28, 2021. At the hearing, the Munich District Court dismissed the request for stay of enforcement. On February 25, 2021 the Munich District Court confirmed its earlier ex parte anti-anti-suit injunction against Xiaomi. Xiaomi appealed the decision to the Higher Regional Court Munich, which is currently pending. On April 27, 2021, the Company was informed that the Munich Regional Court commenced service of three patent infringement actions filed in Germany against Xiaomi and certain of its subsidiaries by a subsidiary of the Company. The complaints involve infringement of the Company's German patents related to 3G and 4G cellular handsets (Patent Nos. EP 2,421,318; EP 2,485,558; and EP 3,355,537). The Company sought injunctive relief to prevent further infringement of the asserted patents in Germany. OTHER We are party to certain other disputes and legal actions in the ordinary course of business, including legal proceedings with licensees regarding the terms of their agreements and the negotiation thereof. We do not currently believe that these matters, even if adversely adjudicated or settled, would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. None of the preceding matters have met the requirements for accrual or disclosure of a potential range as of June 30, 2021. |