Skip to main content

Standard Essential Patents

What happens when a standard-setting organization establishes a technical standard that can be complied with only through the use of a patented technology? This module focuses on that problem, building on a case study of the Microsoft v. Motorola litigation. Key issues involved in the case study include the problem of setting fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms and deciding whether an injunction should apply. The materials in this module were created by Cynthia Laury Dahl, Practice Professor of Law and Director of the Detkin Intellectual Property and Technology Legal Clinic at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.

Applicable Courses: Intellectual Property, Patents, Contracts, Regulatory Law, Technology Policy


Selected Cases

  • Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. v. Avanci, LLC, No. 20-11032, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 17079 (5th Cir. June 21, 2022)
  • HTC Corp. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, 12 F.4th 476 (5th Cir. 2021)
  • Optis Wireless Tech. v. Apple Inc., 2:19-CV-00066-JRG, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110317 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 14, 2021)
  • TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, 943 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2019)
  • FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., 969 F.3d 974 (9th Cir. 2020)
    • Prior history: FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., 17-CV-00220-LHK, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190051 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2018)
  • Huawai v. Samsung, Shenzhen Intermediate Court (2018) (China)
  • TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson et al., 8:14-cv-00341, (C.D. Cal 2017)
  • Unwired Planet v. Huawei, 2017 EWHC 711 (Pat) (UK)
  • Xian Xidian Jietong Wireless Communication Co., Ltd (IWNComm) v SONY Mobile Communication Products (China) Co. Ltd., Beijing Intellectual Property Court (2017)
  • Motorola v. Microsoft 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015)
  • Samsung Inc. v. Apple Limited Patent Act, Sec. 100; Civil Code, Sec. 1 para. 3 IIC 46: 124 (2015) (Japan)
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation v. Cisco SystemsInc. 809 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2015)
  • Ericsson Inc. v. D-Link Systems, Inc. 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
  • Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 2013 WL 2111217 (W.D. Wash 2013)
  • Innovatio IP Ventures LLC Patent Litigation 2013 WL 5593609 (N.D. Ill. 2013)

Selected Executive Branch Materials

Selected Articles

To top