The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Apple. The patent infringement lawsuit concerns Apple's newest A7 processor and the products that it powers.

WARF's formal complaint before the court states that "This is an action for infringement of a patent awarded to computer scientists for their work at the University of Wisconsin—Madison. The patent is owned by the plaintiff, Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation ("WARF"), the designated patent management organization of the University of Wisconsin – Madison. WARF's mission is to support research and scholarship at the University. Since 1925, WARF has used the revenue from patents developed by University researchers to support the University's on-going educational and research work.

The patent-in-suit is United States Patent No. 5,781,752 (the "'752 patent"), entitled "Table Based Data Speculation Circuit for Parallel Processing Computer" was granted to inventors Andreas Moshovos, Scott Breach, Terani Vijaykumar, and Gurindar Sohi. The inventors are leading researchers in the field of computer microprocessor architecture. Their work at the University of Wisconsin—Madison, particularly the work for which they were awarded the patent-in-suit, has significantly improved the efficiency and performance of contemporary computer processors.





This work has been recognized as a major milestone in the field of computer microprocessor architecture/design. Indeed, Dr. Sohi, the leader of the lab that developed the '752 patent, has been elected to the National Academy of Engineering based on his work in the field of computer architecture. And in 2011 he received the computer architecture community's most prestigious award, the Eckert-Mauchly Award, also based on his work, including specifically the work in the '752 patent. Another inventor, Dr. Moshovos, received the prestigious Maurice Wilkes award from the Association for Computing Machinery, for outstanding contribution to computer architecture by an individual in the profession 20 years or less, for his work in the '752 patent.

WARF is informed and believes, and on this basis alleges, that Apple is one of the largest makers of smart phones and tablet computers in the world.

WARF is informed and believes, and on this basis alleges, that Apple's newest products—including the iPhone 5S, the iPad Air, and the iPad Mini with Retina Display—each use Apple's newest A7 processor.

WARF is informed and believes, and on this basis alleges, that Apple has incorporated the technology of WARF's '752 patent into the A7 processor to achieve enhanced efficiency and performance. WARF now asks this Court to prevent Apple's unauthorized use of the '752 patent.

Since the issuance of the '752 patent, Apple has filed one or more patent applications that cite the '752 patent as relevant prior art.

Apple has stated that it is the policy of the company not to accept or consider proposals regarding licensing from outside entities like WARF for any purpose, making the initiation of this lawsuit a necessity."

The complaint further states that "WARF is informed and believes, and on this basis alleges, that the acts of infringement by Defendant have been, and continue to be, willful, intentional, and in conscious disregard of WARF's rights in the '752 patent." This particular point in the complaint is basically requesting that the court triple the damages against Apple should they be found guilty of patent infringement.

The patent infringement case presented in today's report was filed in the Wisconsin Western District Court, Madison Office. At present, no Judge has been assigned to the case.

Patently Apple presents only a brief summary of certain legal cases/ lawsuits which are part of the public record for journalistic news purposes. Readers are cautioned that Patently Apple does not offer an opinion on the merit of the case and strictly presents the allegations made in said legal cases / lawsuits. A lawyer should be consulted for any further details or analysis. About Comments: Patently Apple reserves the right to post, dismiss or edit comments. On most legal cases, comments will be closed. See our Legal Archives for other patent infringement cases.