{"id":8140,"date":"2026-10-15T06:51:37","date_gmt":"2026-10-15T06:51:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.tantraanalyst.com\/ta\/?p=8140"},"modified":"2026-10-15T07:03:25","modified_gmt":"2026-10-15T07:03:25","slug":"the-judgment-day-qualcomm-wins-ala-and-interference-unfair-competition-claims-arm-prevails-in-tla-claim","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tantraanalyst.com\/ta\/the-judgment-day-qualcomm-wins-ala-and-interference-unfair-competition-claims-arm-prevails-in-tla-claim\/","title":{"rendered":"The Judgment Day: Qualcomm wins ALA and Interference \/ Unfair Competition Claims, Arm Prevails in TLA Claim"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row fullwidth=”yes”][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”{“margin-bottom“:“35px“}”]<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/span><\/h6>\n
<\/h5>\n
Coverage of the trail: <\/strong><\/span><\/h5>\n
Day 1: <\/strong>Opening Statements, CEOs take the stand<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h6>\n
Day 2: <\/strong>ALA Commitments and Bloomberg leak in focus<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h6>\n
Day 3:<\/strong> Focus on License Rates, Judge\u2019s Questions on Remedy, and XXXXXX<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h6>\n
Day 4: <\/strong>More XXXXX, Companies Rest Their Case, and Other Considerations<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h6>\n
Day 5: <\/strong>Case in Jury\u2019s Hands, Arguments Conclude in Bench Trial, My Final Take<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/span><\/h6>\n

\n<\/strong>Despite the case’s complexity and the even more complex verdict form, the jury made a quick decision. Unlike the last case, they were also decisive. Qualcomm won on its two most important claims, which its lawyer said were crucial to the company’s future: breach of the ALA and interference and unfair competition. As their lawyer Karen Dunn put it in the closing argument, this was a case of principles and, if nothing else, the jury should side with Qualcomm and award nominal monetary compensation. And that\u2019s exactly what they did.<\/span><\/h6>\n
Arm prevailed on the TLA claim, which is extremely important to them, because the vast majority of their customers have TLAs. They also felt vindicated with the mere $2 of total damages. All along, their lawyers had argued that there was no significant material harm.<\/span><\/h6>\n
Not to gloat, but this is exactly what I had predicted in my last day\u2019s blog (Check Day 5 link above):<\/span><\/h6>\n
\u201c\u2026Here is my take on the jury trials, FWIW:<\/em><\/span><\/h6>\n
    \n
  1. \n
    On the ALA breach case, Qualcomm has made a strong case, except for Arm\u2019s last-minute \u201ccustomization\u201d argument\u2026 <\/em><\/span><\/h6>\n<\/li>\n
  2. \n
    On the TLA breach, \u2026Arm has brought some interesting questions on motivation, etc., to sow doubt in the jury\u2019s mind\u2026<\/em><\/span><\/h6>\n<\/li>\n
  3. \n
    On the interference claim, Qualcomm has an airtight case, with solid arguments and proof\u2026\u201d <\/em><\/span><\/h6>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
    Possible reasons for Jury\u2019s decision:<\/strong><\/span><\/h5>\n
    Well, it is impossible to know about the jury deliberations. In the handful of jury trials I’ve attended, juries seem to relate more to and believe the non-legalese testimony of folks on the ground doing the hard work than the polished, sometimes brash, words of top executives. Here are a few things that might have tipped the jury one way or the other: Arm\u2019s internal documents about \u201cunwinding\u201d ALA, and views of Qualcomm\u2019s Nuvia acquisition; Arm\u2019s coordinated \u201cPR play,\u201d which might look normal for marketing\/business folks, but did not seem so to the jury; In the same vein, testimony of some of Qualcomm\u2019s engineers with no plan for using the TLA cores, etc. The damages calculations claims (done behind closed doors) didn\u2019t convince the jury either.<\/span><\/h6>\n
    What\u2019s next?<\/strong><\/span><\/h5>\n
    Well, jury trial is only the first part of the case. It sets the tone and stage for what comes next. Other equally significant court contests and decisions lie ahead. Qualcomm\u2019s win on ALA and tortious claims jury factual finding will be on the judge\u2019s mind.<\/span><\/h6>\n
    Bench Trials: <\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n
    The closing arguments in the bench trial are scheduled for Oct 20th<\/sup>. The judge, not the jury, will decide this trial. The arguments for this trial happened every day after the jury retired. The judge will rule on two things:<\/span><\/h6>\n
      \n
    1. \n
      Did Arm refuse to negotiate with Qualcomm for a license for the latest version of the Arm ISA (v10)?<\/span><\/h6>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n