Qualcomm v. Nokia (Fed. Cir. 2006).
A 2001 license agreement between Nokia and Qualcomm includes an arbitration clause. The agreement apparently does not cover all of Nokia’s products, and in 2005, and Qualcomm sued Nokia for patent infringement. The parties disputed whether the arbitration clause should apply here. Writing for a two-judge majority, Judge Prost explained that the parties “clearly and unmistakably” intended that the patent questions be arbitrated instead of a court as evidenced by the agreement’s incorporation of the AAA rules.
On remand, the district court will send the dispute to arbitration unless the arguments supporting arbitrability of the issues would be “wholly groundless.”
Notes:
- Read the Opinion
- One-line dissent by Newman
