Apple and MPH’s trademark dispute resurfaced with a new subpoena for the iphone patent.

Messages on iPhone
Apple is fighting to have litigation funding firm Omni Bridgeway comply a subpoena that demands details about its relationship MPH, a company Apple has a patent dispute with over iMessages and FaceTime. MPH Technologies, a Finnish holding company, sued Apple in 2018 over claims that the iPhone maker had infringed on its patents. Apple is attempting to obtain information about MPH in the latest episode of the long-running suit from a company that allegedly funds the lawsuit. Apple was accused of infringing on IP rights by sending and forwarding secure messages. Apple’s software that is affected by the lawsuit includes iMessage and FaceTime as well as an always-on VPN function that’s part a mobile device manager (MDM). MPH tried to convince Apple in 2016 to license its technology, but failed. Apple challenged the patents through the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board for a long time, but the lawsuit was revived in the year 2023. Reuters reports that a new trial has been scheduled for April 2025. Please provide more funding details. Apple demanded that any communications between MPH, including the lawsuit funders, and MPH regarding the alleged patents and infringement be detailed. Apple believed that any doubts expressed by third parties about the value of patents would strengthen its case. MPH refused to provide the information claiming that agreements with third party funding sources were irrelevant and Apple’s request too broad. In June, an American magistrate judge sided with MPH and denied Apple’s request. Apple was told to work with MPH in discovery disputes. Apple, however, quietly decided in December to take a different route and subpoena Omni Bridgeway. The subpoena requested documents and testimony regarding Omni Bridgeway’s relationship to MPH. Reuters claims that Apple has no reason to believe Omni Bridgeway is involved in the case, as all details are sealed. Omni Bridgeway raised a number objections to the subpoena. These included the fact that the demand was vague, and sought information which was privileged. Apple attempted to force Omni Bridgeway to comply by July. Apple chose to go through Delaware, where Omni Bridgeway has its headquarters, instead of the San Francisco court and the MPH-Apple existing case. Omni Bridgeway, after the case was assigned a Delaware judge in the Apple-MPH lawsuit, moved to transfer the case to the same judge. U.S. district judge Colm Connoly in Delaware requires litigants to disclose their relationships with outside backers, and if those people have any say in legal strategy. Apple, citing the fact that Omni’s headquarters are located in the state, has resisted the transfer of a judge who may be friendly. Omni, on the other hand, insists the main lawsuit should be heard by the same San Francisco court. Judge Connolly is yet to make a decision on the matter.