$300m Apple verdict overturned as appeals court finds jury form flawed!

Apple wins appeal as judges find $300m jury verdict violated its right to unanimous decision-making

Apple has successfully overturned a $300 million jury verdict after a US federal appeals court found the jury’s verdict form fatally flawed, ordering a fresh trial in its bitter patent battle with Optis Cellular Technology.

The ruling, handed down on 16 June by Judges Sharon Prost, Jimmie Reyna, and Leonard Stark of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, vacates both the infringement and damages findings from a Texas jury trial. At the heart of the issue: a verdict form that failed to ensure jurors unanimously agreed on which patent Apple allegedly infringed.

In a strongly worded opinion, Judge Prost said the form improperly lumped multiple patents into a single question, allowing jurors to find Apple liable even if they disagreed on the specific patent Apple violated.

“As long as each juror believed some claim of some patent was infringed, the jury was required to answer ‘Yes’,” Prost wrote. “That’s not unanimity—it’s ambiguity.”

The case stems from a lawsuit brought by Optis, a patent holding company, which accused Apple of infringing five standard essential patents (SEPs) linked to 4G LTE technology. The patents covered technologies used in Apple’s iPhones, iPads, and smartwatches.

The jury awarded Optis a lump sum of $300 million in damages. But Apple argued that it had been denied its constitutional right to a unanimous verdict on each distinct infringement claim—and the court agreed.

The ruling marks the second major reversal for Optis in its years-long litigation campaign against Apple in the US. In an earlier trial, Optis won a $506 million damages award, only for Apple to secure a partial retrial after the court found the jury had not been fully informed of Optis’s obligations to license the patents on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms.

That retrial, limited to damages only, led to the now-overturned $300 million award.

The latest setback for Optis is significant, but it’s not the end of the road. A new trial in the Eastern District of Texas will now be required to determine both liability and potential damages—assuming Optis pursues the case further.

Apple’s legal team, led by Mark Fleming of WilmerHale, included heavyweights Joseph Mueller, Timothy Syrett, Brittany Amadi, and Mark Selwyn. Optis was represented by attorneys from Goodwin Procter and Irell & Manella, including William Jay, Jason Sheasby, and Hong Zhong.

The tech giant continues to face legal pressure from Optis across the Atlantic. Just last month, the UK Court of Appeal ordered Apple to pay $502 million for use of the same 4G technology, overturning a High Court ruling in a landmark decision on FRAND licensing obligations.

Apple has not publicly commented on the US appeal victory, but the win underscores its aggressive strategy to push back against royalty demands it views as inflated or procedurally unsound.

For Optis, the latest ruling forces a reset in its high-stakes showdown with one of the world’s most powerful tech companies—a reminder that even nine-figure verdicts can vanish if legal fundamentals aren’t followed.