Qualcomm is claiming victory in its court battle with chip design giant Arm after a jury in the US found that its processor designs are properly licensed.
However, the case ended in a mistrial, leaving the door open for Arm to return with a fresh action.
Following a week-long federal court trial held in the state of Delaware, jurors could not reach a decision on whether AI chip startup Nuvia - purchased by Qualcomm for $1.4 billion in 2021 - breached the terms of its agreement to license Arm IP. This led to the mistrial outcome.
However, the jurors said Qualcomm did not breach its license, and that its chips, which incorporate Nuvia technology, are properly licensed.
Describing this result as a “win,” a Qualcomm spokesperson said: “The jury has vindicated Qualcomm’s right to innovate and affirmed that all the Qualcomm products at issue in the case are protected by Qualcomm’s contract with Arm.”
Arm’s contention is that, by purchasing Nuvia and using the startup’s architectural licenses, Qualcomm is in violation of its own licensing agreement, which previously had only covered standard Arm chip blueprints.
The two companies have a long-standing and deep partnership, but relations have soured since the court case was launched in 2022. In October, Arm reportedly issued a 60-day cancellation notice terminating Qualcomm’s use of the architectural license it acquired in the Nuvia deal.
Judge Maryellen Noreika, who presided over the case, said the companies should try and find a solution to their dispute without resorting to another court battle.
"I don't think either side had a clear victory or would have had a clear victory if this case is tried again," Noreika said.
Qualcomm specializes in chips for smartphones and other mobile devices, but is looking to make an impact in the AI PC and server markets too, and sees its purchase of Nuvia as central to this. Earlier this year, it launched Snapdragon X, a PC chip that is being deployed in Acer laptops.
An Arm spokesperson told Reuters the company was “disappointed” the jury had been unable to reach “consensus” on all the claims in the case.
