Apple Won't Get Rehearing in VirnetX Patent Infringement Battle Dating Back to 2010, Court Rules - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Apple Won't Get Rehearing in VirnetX Patent Infringement Battle Dating Back to 2010, Court Rules

Apple will not be able to get a rehearing in its ongoing patent battle with VirnetX to argue that the patents it is accused of infringing are invalid, reports Bloomberg.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today rejected Apple's request to reconsider a November ruling that confirmed Apple infringed on two VirnetX patents.

virnetx apple
The patent dispute between VirnetX and Apple dates back to 2010 when VirnetX accused Apple's FaceTime feature of infringing on its intellectual property, and there are multiple lawsuits involved.

In this particular case, VirnetX was awarded $502.6 million in April 2018 after a court ruled that Apple's ‌FaceTime‌, iMessage, and VPN on Demand features infringed on four VirnetX patents related to communications security.

An appeals court later reexamined the ruling and determined that Apple had infringed on two VirnetX patents, but the other two counts were reversed in November 2019 and the $502.6 million award was vacated. The case was sent back to a lower court to determine whether revised damages can be calculated or if there will be a new damages trial, but the ruling was ultimately in favor of VirnetX.

At this time, with Apple's request for a rehearing on patent validity denied, Apple and VirnetX are awaiting details on the new damages Apple will be required to pay.

In a separate case, Apple was ordered to pay $440 million to VirnetX for similar patent infringement issues. Apple appealed that ruling multiple times as well, but an appeals court in January 2019 ruled in VirnetX's favor, leaving Apple responsible for a $440 million patent infringement fee.

Popular Stories

iphone duo facetime

iPhone Duo's Hidden FaceTime Camera Takes 'Trash' Photos

Wednesday October 21, 2026 11:36 am PDT by
The iPhone Duo's inner screen has an under-display front camera that's largely hidden from view. It's the first time we've seen an under-display camera on an iPhone, and it turns out there's a reason Apple hasn't used the technology before. Apple said the camera offers 1080p video recording, but didn't mention photo quality. Gizmodo said it's a 4-megapixel camera and described the photos as...
iphone duo facetime

Why Can't iPhone Duo Users Make Eye Contact on FaceTime?

Monday October 26, 2026 3:49 pm PDT by
FaceTime's Eye Contact setting is missing on the iPhone Duo, MacRumors can confirm. The setting was first flagged as absent by MacRumors forum member TwoBytes, who noticed their eyes looking "a little off" during a call. Introduced in iOS 14, Eye Contact uses machine learning to subtly adjust your eyes during a video call to make it seem like you're looking into the camera lens, even though ...
Taptic Engine iPhone 6s

Apple Could Owe Even More After $5.7 Billion Patent Verdict

Tuesday October 20, 2026 8:24 pm PDT by
Apple could face additional payments on top of a $5.7 billion patent verdict, with Taction Technology asking a federal judge for more damages, interest, and royalties on future iPhone and Apple Watch sales. The request follows a September jury verdict that Apple's Taptic Engine infringed two Taction patents covering haptic feedback, the technology that produces taps and vibrations in...

Top Rated Comments

oneMadRssn Avatar
88 months ago
I wish there was a way to get patents on obvious ideas invalidated.
There is. It's called Inter Partes Review ("IPR"). It's a process much cheaper than litigation that allows anyone to ask a special board at the USPTO to take a second look at a patent. Historically, that process has resulted in roughly 75% of patents they look at to be found invalid. Patent owners call them the patent death squad, while defendants usually hail them as cleaning up the system.

Apple tried to IPR these patents and did not succeed. If the patent death squad didn't rule them to be obvious, that should tell you how non-obvious they are.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
88 months ago

This is how a rotten patent system works: patent trolls will win every single time.
"every single time" seems like an exaggeration to me. And like I've told my kids a million times, never exaggerate.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
sw1tcher Avatar
88 months ago

Is it guaranteed that they're a patent troll?
Ruling not in Apple's favor? Patent troll.

That's how it works around here.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ruslan120 Avatar
88 months ago
Is it guaranteed that they're a patent troll? Inventing new IP and then selling it off or licensing is a valid form of business, especially for colleges and universities.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
I7guy Avatar
88 months ago
Pay up and let’s get on with life.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
88 months ago

There is. It's called Inter Partes Review ("IPR"). It's a process much cheaper than litigation that allows anyone to ask a special board at the USPTO to take a second look at a patent. Historically, that process has resulted in roughly 75% of patents they look at to be found invalid. Patent owners call them the patent death squad, while defendants usually hail them as cleaning up the system.

Apple tried to IPR these patents and did not succeed. If the patent death squad didn't rule them to be obvious, that should tell you how non-obvious they are.
The PTAB did rule that the patents at issue (i.e. relevant claims of those patents) were invalid. It did so not based on them being obvious, but based on them being anticipated by prior art (i.e. Takahiro Kiuchi - The Development of a Secure, Closed HTTP-Based Network on the Internet (1996)).

There were 4 patents which Apple was, in this case, found to have infringed - '211, '504, '135, and '151. The PTAB instituted an IPR against each of those patents. That means that the Board found that there was a reasonable likelihood that the petitioners (Black Swamp for '211 and '504, Mangrove Partners for '135 and '151) would be able to demonstrate invalidity for some of the claims at issue.

The Federal Circuit found that Apple hadn't infringed '211 and '504 - i.e., it found that Apple was entitled to JMOL on the infringement issue because no reasonable jury could, using proper claim constructions, find that Apple infringed the asserted claims of those patents. But, for the record, the PTAB found many claims of those patents invalid as anticipated by Kiuchi.

Regarding '135 and '151, the PTAB also found that the asserted claims from those patents (2 from '135 and 1 from '151) - as well as most of the other claims of those patents - were invalid as anticipated by Kiuchi. The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded those decisions for a number of reasons that I won't get lost in.

However, among other issues, the Federal Circuit left it for the PTAB to consider the obviousness issue with regard to both patents. The PTAB hadn't previously needed to decide on obviousness because it had found anticipation. The Federal Circuit also left it for the PTAB to reconsider the anticipation issue with regard to '135. The PTAB heard arguments in these matters a few weeks ago.

So we don't know whether the claims at issue will ultimately be found, through IPR, to be invalid. But the point is that there's at least some reasonable arguments to be made that they are invalid.

To be clear, that most likely (barring an unlikely review by the Supreme Court) won't help Apple when it comes to the case which is the subject of this thread. Apple hasn't been allowed to make the invalidity arguments that it wanted to because of previous litigation, involving the same patents, between the parties. So even if VirnetX's asserted claims (from '135 and '151) are ultimately invalidated through the IPR process, Apple will likely have to pay damages based on having infringed them. What's left now is to determine how much Apple will have to pay.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Latest Stories
Siri AI Rumored to Become 'More Like an Agent' as Early as Next Year
Siri AI Rumored to Become 'More Like an Agent' as Early as Next Year
2 hours ago
Apple Taking New Approach to Developing iOS 28 and macOS 28
Apple Taking New Approach to Developing iOS 28 and macOS 28
4 hours ago
Early Apple Black Friday Deals on Apple Watch, MacBook Air, and More
Early Apple Black Friday Deals on Apple Watch, MacBook Air, and More
23 hours ago
'Backglow' Lets You Customize New MacBook Pro's Glowing Apple Logo
'Backglow' Lets You Customize New MacBook Pro's Glowing Apple Logo
23 hours ago
Top Stories: Apple Product Launches, iOS 27.3 Beta, and More
Top Stories: Apple Product Launches, iOS 27.3 Beta, and More
1 day ago
More Fun iPhone Duo Apps: 30 New Picks to Try
More Fun iPhone Duo Apps: 30 New Picks to Try
2 days ago
Hands-On With Apple's New OLED Touchscreen MacBook Pro
Hands-On With Apple's New OLED Touchscreen MacBook Pro
2 days ago
Apple Store With All-New Design Opening Soon in Southern California
Apple Store With All-New Design Opening Soon in Southern California
2 days ago
Control the Glowing Apple Logo on Your New MacBook Pro
Control the Glowing Apple Logo on Your New MacBook Pro
2 days ago
Apple Shares New 'Apple Card: Apply and Use in Minutes' Ad
Apple Shares New 'Apple Card: Apply and Use in Minutes' Ad
2 days ago
Apple Says More Than 100,000 Apps Optimized for iPhone Duo, Here's What's Still Missing
Apple Says More Than 100,000 Apps Optimized for iPhone Duo, Here's What's Still Missing
2 days ago
Early Black Friday Deals Kickoff With Steep Discounts on Apple Watch Ultras and More
Early Black Friday Deals Kickoff With Steep Discounts on Apple Watch Ultras and More
2 days ago
The MacRumors Show: iOS 27.3 Looks Like a Huge Update
The MacRumors Show: iOS 27.3 Looks Like a Huge Update
2 days ago
Best Buy's Black Friday Event Begins With Sitewide Savings on Apple, TVs, More
Best Buy's Black Friday Event Begins With Sitewide Savings on Apple, TVs, More
2 days ago
Apple Releasing Yet Another Two New Products Next Week
Apple Releasing Yet Another Two New Products Next Week
2 days ago
MacBook Air Drops to Lowest Price in Months With Amazon's $250 Discount
MacBook Air Drops to Lowest Price in Months With Amazon's $250 Discount
2 days ago
Apple Rumored to Drop the iPhone's Action Button Next Year
Apple Rumored to Drop the iPhone's Action Button Next Year
2 days ago
Apple's Extended Return Policy Now in Effect for 2026 Holiday Season
Apple's Extended Return Policy Now in Effect for 2026 Holiday Season
2 days ago
Apple Music Classical Updated With New Icon and Refreshed Design
Apple Music Classical Updated With New Icon and Refreshed Design
2 days ago
OLED iPad Mini, M6 iMac, and New MacBook Pros Available From Today
OLED iPad Mini, M6 iMac, and New MacBook Pros Available From Today
2 days ago
Apple Surveys iPhone Duo Buyers About Crease and Camera
Apple Surveys iPhone Duo Buyers About Crease and Camera
3 days ago
Apple's First Touchscreen Mac is Now Arriving to Customers
Apple's First Touchscreen Mac is Now Arriving to Customers
3 days ago
Claude Gets Personal Finance Feature With Bank Account Linking
Claude Gets Personal Finance Feature With Bank Account Linking
3 days ago
Apple Arcade Adds Crossy Road Rush and NBA 2K27
Apple Arcade Adds Crossy Road Rush and NBA 2K27
3 days ago
Apple's New HomeView Smart Home Hub: Here's How Much RAM It Has
Apple's New HomeView Smart Home Hub: Here's How Much RAM It Has
3 days ago
iPad Mini vs. iPad Air Buyer's Guide: Now Just $50 Apart
iPad Mini vs. iPad Air Buyer's Guide: Now Just $50 Apart
3 days ago
First iOS 27.3 and macOS Golden Gate 27.3 Public Betas Now Available
First iOS 27.3 and macOS Golden Gate 27.3 Public Betas Now Available
3 days ago
Apple Announces a New Mac Sales Record
Apple Announces a New Mac Sales Record
3 days ago
Paid $200 for Logic Pro? Apple Says You Won't Get This New Feature
Paid $200 for Logic Pro? Apple Says You Won't Get This New Feature
3 days ago
Instagram's Edits Video Editor is Now Available on Mac
Instagram's Edits Video Editor is Now Available on Mac
3 days ago