The companies are fighting over three patents that Qualcomm says Apple infringed in the development of some versions of its iPhone. One of those patents allows a smartphone to quickly connect to the internet once the device is booted up.
Apple has argued that one of its then-engineers, Arjuna Siva, co-invented the technology and should be named on the patent as well.
Siva was scheduled to testify later in the trial, but Apple counsel Juanita Brooks said Thursday that won’t happen. She said Siva has retained new counsel that has advised him not to answer Apple’s questions. He isn’t intending to appear, but if subpoenaed, he will testify, Brooks said. He was expected to arrive in San Diego on Wednesday night, but never boarded his flight, she said.
Apple can still play Siva’s video deposition.
The loss of a star witness is a blow to Apple’s prospects for the trial, which is just the latest in a wide-ranging legal saga. Two years ago, the Federal Trade Commission, aided by heavyweights including Apple and Intel, accused Qualcomm of operating a monopoly in modem chips. The agency argued that Qualcomm’s high royalty rates stopped competitors from entering the market, driving up the cost of phones and hurting consumers. That trial took place in January, and the parties are waiting for a decision.
The San Diego trial, presided over by US District Judge Dana Sabraw, is more technical than the other parts of the legal battle. But it could have implications for how your phone is made and how much it costs. Aside from the boot-up patent, the companies are fighting over two others. One of them deals with graphics processing and battery life. The third lets apps on your phone download data more easily by directing traffic between the apps processor and the modem.
Brooks said Siva’s new counsel is a former partner at Quinn Emanuel, the law firm representing Qualcomm. She accused Qualcomm’s defense of witness tampering, and indicated Apple wouldn’t be subpoenaing Siva. “He’s a tainted witness,” she said.
Qualcomm’s counsel, David Nelson of Quinn Emanuel, vigorously denied the accusation, getting animated as he addressed Sabraw. “I don’t get angry very often,” he said. “I lead this team. I consider this a personal attack.”
“We wanted Mr. Siva to testify,” Nelson said. He added that he and his team were enjoying putting together the cross-examination for the witness.
Sabraw said the court would continue to look into the matter. “It’s a serious allegation,” he said to Nelson. “There’s no indication that you or anyone at Qualcomm has had anything to do with this.”
Originally published March 7, 9:34 a.m. PT.
Update, 10:22 a.m. PT: Added more information from the trial.