Apple Asks Judge to Overturn $5.7 Billion Taptic Engine Verdict
Apple Asks Federal Court to Overturn Record $5.7 Billion Taction Patent Verdict
Apple filed a motion in federal court asking a judge to set aside a $5.7 billion jury verdict in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Taction Technology over the Taptic Engine used in iPhones and Apple Watches. Taction Technology secured the damages award a few weeks ago after a jury found Apple infringed two patents related to haptic feedback technology.
The Tech TL;DR:
- Apple is challenging what it calls the largest patent verdict in history by over $3 billion, arguing the payout lacks evidentiary support and relies on speculation.
- The company claims Taction’s technical expert, Dr. Oliver, used a “rigged” testing method rather than the measurement protocol described in the disputed patents.
- The presiding judge questioned whether the $5.7 billion figure matched the jury’s actual intent before the award was formally entered.
Apple Challenges Taction Damages Award as Baseless
In its filing, Apple argues that Taction failed to present sufficient evidence to justify any damages award, let alone a $5.7 billion figure. The company notes that the court excluded the analysis of Taction’s damages expert prior to trial due to calculation flaws regarding a previous licensing agreement, subsequently barring the expert from testifying entirely. According to Apple’s motion, Taction never established the financial worth of its patented contribution, instead asking jurors to award whatever reasonable royalty they deemed appropriate.
Apple stated in the filing that Taction left the jury “with no choice but to engage in impermissible guesswork on a massive scale.” Furthermore, the company highlights that the trial judge admitted uncertainty over whether the $5.7 billion amount accurately reflected what the jury meant to convey on the verdict form.
Disputed Testing Methods for the Taptic Engine
The core technical dispute centers on how haptic feedback output is measured. Taction’s two patents describe technology meant to produce consistent vibrations across varying frequencies. Apple contends that its Taptic Engine operates differently by delivering significantly stronger vibrations at specific frequencies.
Apple asserts that Dr. Oliver developed a novel testing method specifically for the litigation to measure how Apple’s electronic control system regulates transducer output, rather than evaluating whether the hardware meets the patent requirements. The filing states that no reasonable juror could determine the output was “highly damped” under the court’s construction using the patent’s specified testing procedure. Apple maintains that testing data introduced during the case showed a peaked response that Dr. Oliver conceded was not highly damped.
The court will now weigh Apple’s arguments to determine whether to uphold the award, overturn the verdict, or grant a new trial covering infringement, validity, and damages.