Apple is taking legal action against the Australian litigation funder Omni Bridgeway in order to compel them to provide documents related to a patent dispute that has been ongoing for a while against Apple.
In 2018, Finland’s MPH Technologies filed a lawsuit against Apple, claiming that the company had violated eight patents related to its messaging services and requesting compensation. The legal battle has gone through multiple court hearings as Apple questioned the legitimacy of the patents and disputed the allegations of infringement.
This month in Delaware, Apple fought back by requesting the court to issue broad orders for Omni Bridgeway to clarify its involvement in the case and provide documents related to it. Although Apple does not allege any misconduct by Omni Bridgeway, many documents in the Delaware District Court have been kept confidential at Apple’s request. Apple may argue that any financial arrangement between Omni Bridgeway and MPH Technologies could impact the legitimacy of the case. In a public document related to the case, Apple’s lawyer Hannah Cannom of Walker Stevens Cannom mentioned that the company had issued a subpoena in December upon learning of Omni’s involvement.
Also Read: Motorola Razr 50 Ultra review: The foldable smartphone gets serious
Discussions took place between the two parties, but then they came to a standstill. Omni has not provided any requested documents or offered a witness for a deposition, according to a statement. MPH Technologies, in its court filings, does not mention Omni Bridgeway but claims to be the successor to a Finnish company that created the patents. Some believe MPH Technologies is a “patent troll,” which refers to a company that acquires intellectual property rights to sue others. Intellectual property cases against companies like Apple can result in high monetary judgments or product sales being stopped. Omni Bridgeway allocates a significant portion of its funding to intellectual property litigation, stating its purpose as monetizing patent assets. Their financing model assists companies in protecting their rights while saving funds for research and development. Omni’s legal representative argues that the scope of the subpoena is unclear and objects to its requests due to being burdensome. The case is awaiting a ruling from Delaware judge Colm Connolly, and both Apple and Omni Bridgeway have not provided a comment on the matter.
