Lenovo can fight 5G rulings for Ericsson in South America, US court rules
Adds comment from Lenovo in paragraph 3, updates headline
By Blake Brittain
Oct 24 -Lenovo 0992.HK on Thursday convinced a U.S. appeals court to revive its bid to halt court orders that Ericsson ERICb.ST won in Brazil and Colombia in the companies' patent licensing dispute over 5G wireless technology.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with Lenovo that a North Carolina judge should reconsider the company's request for an order to block rulings that Lenovo must stop selling smartphones in the some South American countries that allegedly infringe Ericsson's patents.
An Ericsson spokesperson declined to comment on the decision. Lenovo said in a statement that the decision was positive "for Lenovo and for the greater good of the industry as we seek guidance, fairness and transparency in licensing negotiations."
Owners of patents covering technology that devices must include to comply with international standards must offer licenses on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Disputes over FRAND licensing have led to global legal battles in the telecom industry.
Ericsson sued Lenovo in North Carolina last year for infringing patents and breaking its FRAND commitment after the companies failed to agree on licensing terms for their 5G patents.
Ericsson had filed related lawsuits against Lenovo in Colombia and Brazil, where courts later issued preliminary orders blocking sales of Lenovo smartphones accused of misusing Ericsson's 5G technology. Lenovo had asked the North Carolina court to stop Ericsson from enforcing the orders, and U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle had ruled for Ericsson.
A three-judge Federal Circuit panel ruled on Thursday that Boyle must reconsider whether Ericsson had complied with the international standards requirement to negotiate licenses "in good faith" before seeking injunctive relief like the South American orders.
The case is Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Lenovo (United States) Inc, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 24-1515.
For Ericsson: Jeffrey Lamken of MoloLamken
For Lenovo: John O'Quinn of Kirkland & Ellis
Read more:
Apple says Ericsson filed 'secret' Colombian patent lawsuits to sideline Texas court
Ericsson and Apple end patent-related legal row with licence deal
Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington
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.
