Jury deliberates in Arm, Qualcomm trial after closing arguments wrap
Jury deliberates on Arm, Qulacomm license dispute
Arm says Qualcomm violated a licensing agreement
Qualcomm argues Arm using suit to gain smartphone leverage
Recasts headline, updates throughout
By Tom Hals
Dec 19 (Reuters) -A license dispute between Arm Holdings O9Ty.F, ARM.O and Qualcomm QCOM.O went before a jury on Thursday after attorneys from both sides completed closing arguments.
The jury in a U.S. federal court in Delaware is considering whether Qualcomm or Nuvia, a startup Qualcomm purchased for $1.4 billion in 2021, breached a license agreement with U.K.-based Arm, which supplies intellectual property to both firms.
The case could upend Qualcomm's push into the PC market with a chip meant to rival Apple AAPL.O and Intel INTC.O on speed.
During closing arguments, Qualcomm's legal team urged the eight-member juryto find the chipmaker had not breached a contract with Arm, warning that the British chip designer was using its lawsuit to try to gain leverage over makers of smart phone chips.
Qualcomm lawyer Karen Dunn told jurors that Arm is hoping to force Qualcomm to destroy its recently launched high-speed chips for AI laptops and then threaten similar license partners who build mobile phone chips off its technology.
"You can bet the world is watching here," Dunn said to the jurors in her closing argument.
Arm's lawyer Daralyn Durie warned the jury such allegations were distractions from the issue they must decide: whether Qualcomm and Nuvia, the start-up it acquired in 2021, breached license agreements.
"It's an effort to get you to think about things that have nothing to do with the breach of the contract," Durie said.
In 2022, Arm said Nuvia and Qualcomm had breached Arm's contract for Nuvia technology and in response the British company terminated the agreement, which obligated Nuvia to destroy the tech built based on that technology. Qualcomm argues that the Nuvia chip designs in question were created independently from Arm.
Arm's attorney Durie said if Qualcomm didn't want to be forced to destroy its microprocessors it should have complied with the terms of its license.
"The decision to go ahead and use all this stuff without a license, that was their choice," Durie said. "Now they are saying that was a bad decision and they are unhappy. But that was their decision not ours."
The jury met for three and a half hours without reaching a verdict and will resume deliberations on Friday morning.
In the trial that started on Monday, Arm sought to portray Qualcomm's moves as a first-of-its-kind flouting of standard contractual terms the British company had used successfully for decades and that would have upended its business model.
At stake for Qualcomm was annual savings of up to $1.4 billion by using the Nuvia designs while claiming the work was done at Qualcomm, which would carry a less expensive licensing deal, Arm attorneys said.
Qualcomm claimed Arm misled it into disbanding its own design team, increasing its dependence on Arm technology and then trying to raise royalty rates as much as 400%. It also pointed to internal Arm documents that it said showed Arm was plotting to get into the chip making business while undermining Qualcomm.
Arm's Chief Executive Rene Haas dismissed those allegations.
Reporting by Tom Hals in Delaware and Stephen Nellis in San Francisco; Writing by Max A. Cherney; Editing by Saad Sayeed and Sonali Paul
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.