Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Despite raising various queries qua plaintiff's agreement with Qualcomm Inc., defendant failed to provide complete information/details to plaintiff about its relationship with Qualcomm Inc. This also shows that objections/queries in relation to plaintiff's agreement with Qualcomm, which were raised by defendant, were nothing but mere delaying tactics. In order to give defendant a clear picture of plaintiff's agreement with Qualcomm Inc. and its effect on the potential agreement, plaintiff shared with defendant, during the course of their meeting on 22nd May, 2012, a document titled as "Exhibit C" (an Exhibit of the agreement entered between plaintiff and Qualcomm Inc.). The aforesaid document clearly shows that plaintiff's agreement with Qualcomm Inc. is limited in scope and cannot be interpreted to mean that any company which is using Qualcomm's chipsets is exempted from taking a licence in respect of plaintiff's entire portfolio of Standard Essential Patents. Despite the aforesaid, the defendant kept raising repetitive queries in relation to plaintiff's agreement with Qualcomm Inc. However, when plaintiff asked for certain details/information which could have helped plaintiff in getting a clearer picture about defendant's concern in relation to the issue of the Qualcomm agreement, defendant failed to provide such details about its relationship with Qualcomm Inc. Plaintiff's agreement with Qualcomm Inc. is restricted only to the field of CDMA applications however, any multimode mobile handsets which also comply with 2G and EDGE technology would still be infringing in nature and would need a license to those applications and as is evident from an analysis of defendant's current and earlier offerings, it does not offer any 3G- enabled single mode mobile handsets.

Despite the aforesaid, the plaintiff agreed to meet defendant on 6th February, 2015 with a view to progress towards commercial discussions thereafter and to finally execute a FRAND license for its SEPs. Further, as per defendant's request, plaintiff's representatives were also carrying a copy of Exhibit C of the Qualcomm agreement for their 6th February meeting in order to discuss the same with defendant. In fact, vide its email dated 29th January, 2015, the plaintiff also shared details of its various representatives who were traveling to India from different parts of the world for attending the meeting with defendant. The plaintiff also requested for a list of participants who would be attending the proposed meeting on behalf of defendant. However, no such details were shared by defendant. On 30th January, 2015, defendant's representative sent an email to plaintiff stating that he will look into plaintiff's email and will revert.