Litigation

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2022

Litigation [Abstract]

Litigation

Note 7 — Litigation (all dollar amounts in this section are expressed in thousands except for rates per device)

We have several intellectual property infringement lawsuits pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“USCAFC”).

VirnetX Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (Case 6:12-CV-00855-LED) (“Apple II”)

This case began on November 6, 2012, when we had filed a complaint against Apple in United States District Court (“USDC”) in which we alleged that Apple infringed on certain of our patents, (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,502,135, 7,418,504, 7,921,211 and 7,490,151). We sought damages and injunctive relief. The accused products include the iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5th Generation, iPad 4th Generation, iPad mini, and the latest Macintosh computers. Post-trial motions hearing was held on July 18, 2018. On August 31, 2018, the USDC entered a Final Judgment and issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding post-trial motions, affirming the jury’s verdict of $502,600 and granting VirnetX motions for supplemental damages, a sunset royalty, and the royalty rate of $1.20 per infringing iPhone, iPad and Mac products, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest and costs. Apple filed a notice of appeal with the USCAFC in the Apple II case.

On October 9, 2018, USCAFC docketed the appeal as Case No. 19-1050 - VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc. On January 24, 2019 Apple filed its opening brief. We filed our response brief on March 1, 2019. Apple filed its reply brief on April 5, 2019. The oral arguments were heard on October 4, 2019. On November 22, 2019, the USCAFC issued an opinion affirming the district court’s findings that Apple is precluded from making certain invalidity arguments and that Apple infringed the ‘135 and ‘151 patents; reversing the USDC’s finding that Apple infringed the ‘504 and ‘211 patents; and remanding the case for proceedings on damages. Apple sought panel and en banc rehearing, which the USCAFC denied on February 10, 2020.

On February 22, 2020, the USDC issued a scheduling order for the parties to brief the court about the need for a new trial for recalculating the damages. We filed our motion for entry of judgment on February 28, 2020. The arguments on this matter were heard on April 14, 2020. In its order, unsealed on May 1, 2020, the USDC denied VirnetX’s motion for entry of a new judgment based on the prior jury verdict and ordered a new jury trial on damages. On August 10, 2020, the USDC granted Apple’s motion for continuance and reset the date to October 26, 2020. On October 30, 2020, a jury returned a $502,800 verdict in favor of VirnetX based on Apple’s infringement of two network security patents: VirnetX US Patents No. 6,502,135 and No. 7,490,151. The jury verdict called for damages of $0.84 per accused device since the 2013 launch of Apple’s iOS 7 operating system and represents 598,629,580 infringing units from US sales only. On January 15, 2021, the district court denied Apple’s motion for judgment as a matter of law, and on February 4, 2021, Apple filed a notice of appeal to the USCAFC.

On February 22, 2021, USCAFC docketed the appeal as Case No. 19-1672. Apple’s opening brief was filed on June 2, 2021. VirnetX filed its responsive brief on July 26, 2021. Apple filed its reply brief on September 13, 2021. The briefing is complete, and we are awaiting the court order with the schedule for oral arguments in this matter.

VirnetX Inc. v. Mangrove Partners Master Fund, Ltd., Apple Inc. (USCAFC Case 20-2271) and VirnetX Inc. v. Mangrove Partners Master Fund, Ltd., Apple Inc., and Black Swamp, LLC (USCAFC Case 20-2272)

On September 15, 2020, we filed with the USCAFC an appeal of the invalidity findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) in inter-partes review proceedings IPR2015-01046 and IPR2016-00062 involving our U.S. Patent No. 6,502,135, and an appeal of the invalidity findings by the PTAB in inter-partes review proceedings IPR2015-1047, IPR2016- 00063, and IPR2016-00167 involving our U.S. Patent No. 7,490,151. On September 25, 2020, the USCAFC issued an order consolidating the two appeals. On December 15, 2020, we filed a motion to vacate the PTAB decisions below and to remand these appeals to the PTAB. On March 16, 2021, the USCAFC denied the motion without prejudice to us raising the challenges made in the motion in our opening brief. Our opening brief was filed on June 7, 2021.

On June 23, 2021, the USCAFC entered an order directing us (and parties in other appeals that raised Appointments Clause challenges) to file a brief explaining how they believe their cases should proceed in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1970 (2021). On July 7, 2021, we filed a brief in response to the court’s order. Other parties, including the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) filed their responses on July 21, 2021. On August 19, 2021, USCAFC issued an order remanding these appeals for the limited purpose of allowing VirnetX the opportunity to request rehearing of the PTAB’s final written decisions by the Director of the USPTO. The USCAFC retained jurisdiction over the appeals in the meantime. On September 20, 2021, we filed our requests for Director rehearing with the USPTO. On October 29, 2021, our requests for Director rehearing were denied. We subsequently filed an amended opening brief to the USCAFC on December 10, 2021, the other parties filed response briefs on February 2, 2022, and we filed a reply brief on February 22, 2022. All the briefings have been completed. We are awaiting the court order with the schedule for oral arguments in this matter.

VirnetX Inc. v. Hirshfeld (USCAFC Case 17-2593, -2594)

On September 22, 2017, we filed with the USCAFC an appeal of the invalidity findings by the PTAB in inter-partes review proceeding IPR2016-00693 involving our U.S. Patent No. 7,418,504, and an appeal of the invalidity findings by the PTAB in inter-partes review proceeding IPR2016-00957 involving our U.S. Patent No. 7,921,211. On September 16, 2021, USCAFC issued an order remanding these appeals for the limited purpose of allowing VirnetX the opportunity to request rehearing of the PTAB’s final written decisions by the Director of the USPTO. The USCAFC retained jurisdiction over the appeals in the meantime. On October 18, 2021, we filed our requests for Director rehearing with the USPTO. On January 7, 2022, our requests for Director rehearing were denied. On January 21, 2022, we informed the USCAFC about the denial of Director rehearing and requested that the court dismiss the appeal involving IPR2016-00957 as moot and vacate the PTAB’s underlying decision. On April 4, 2022, the USCAFC vacated the PTAB’s decision in IPR2016-00957 and remanded Appeal No. 17-2594 with instructions to dismiss. In the April 4, 2022 order, the USCAFC further set a briefing schedule, with VirnetX’s opening brief currently due June 17, 2022.

VirnetX Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (USCAFC Case 19-1671)

On March 18, 2019, we filed with the USCAFC an appeal of the invalidity findings by the PTAB in inter-partes re-examination proceeding 95/001,679 involving our U.S. Patent No. 6,502,135. On October 5, 2021, USCAFC issued an order remanding these appeals for the limited purpose of allowing VirnetX the opportunity to request rehearing of the PTAB’s final written decisions by the Director of the PTO. The USCAFC retained jurisdiction over the appeals in the meantime. Our request for Director rehearing with the PTO was filed on November 5, 2021. On January 10, 2022, our request for Director rehearing was denied. We informed the USCAFC about the denial of Director rehearing. On March 1, 2022, the USCAFC issued an order setting a briefing schedule, with VirnetX’s opening brief currently due May 9, 2022.

VirnetX Inc. v. Apple Inc. (USCAFC Case 22-1523) (“Apple Reexam”)

On March 10, 2022, we filed with the USCAFC an appeal of the invalidity findings by the PTAB in inter-partes re-examination proceeding 95/001,682 involving our U.S. Patent No. 6,502,135. Our opening brief is currently due June 20, 2022.

McKool Smith P.C. v. VirnetX, Inc., AAA Case No. 01-20-0003-7975

On March 23, 2020, the law firm of McKool Smith, P.C. (“McKool”) filed a Demand for Arbitration against VirnetX, Inc. with the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”). In its demand, McKool claimed that a retention agreement it entered into in 2010 with VirnetX entitled it to a contingency fee arising from the recent 2020 payment made in the Apple I case. McKool claimed it was owed approximately $36,300 (or 8% of the Apple I payment). We filed a general response with the AAA denying McKool’s claim and contested the matter vigorously. An evidentiary hearing was held on the matter during the week of February 22, 2021 and the parties submitted additional briefings. On April 19, 2021, the arbitrator awarded McKool $36,323 in damages, plus pre-judgment interest in the amount of 5% simple interest from March 23, 2020 to April 18, 2021, and post-judgment interest in the amount of 5%, compounded annually, until payment of the award. We accrued the resulting $38,284 as of March 31, 2021 and paid that amount to McKool on April 20, 2021. This matter is now closed.

Other Legal Matters

One or more potential intellectual property infringement claims may also be available to us against certain other companies who have the resources to defend against any such claims. Although we believe these potential claims are likely valid, commencing a lawsuit can be expensive and time-consuming, and there is no assurance that we could prevail on such potential claims if we made them. In addition, bringing a lawsuit may lead to potential counterclaims which may distract our management and our other resources, including capital resources, from efforts to successfully commercialize our products.

Currently, we are not a party to any other pending legal proceedings and are not aware of any proceeding threatened or contemplated against us.