Motorola Mobility vs. Ericsson: ITC Settlement in Wireless Communication Patent Dispute
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
📋 Case Summary
| Case Name | Motorola Mobility, LLC v. Ericsson AB |
| Case Number | 337-TA-1397 (ITC) |
| Court | United States International Trade Commission (ITC) |
| Duration | Mar 2024 – May 2025 443 days |
| Outcome | Settled |
| Patents at Issue | |
| Accused Products | Communication configuration selection systems/implementations (within network equipment or mobile devices) |
In a closely watched wireless technology patent dispute, Motorola Mobility, LLC and Ericsson AB reached a settlement resolving ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-1397 — a case centered on communication configuration selection patents that sat at the intersection of competitive 5G and mobile network infrastructure markets. Filed on March 11, 2024, before the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) and closed May 28, 2025, the case spanned 443 days before the parties agreed to resolve their differences without a final Commission ruling.
The dispute involved two granted U.S. patents — US11076304B2 and US11711706B2 — covering communication configuration selection technology, a foundational capability in modern wireless network design. For patent attorneys, IP professionals, and R&D teams operating in the telecommunications sector, this case underscores the continuing strategic importance of ITC proceedings as leverage tools in wireless patent infringement litigation, and the growing trend toward negotiated resolutions even among global telecom rivals.
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
A Lenovo subsidiary and established player in mobile device and wireless technology markets, holding a substantial patent portfolio.
🛡️ Defendant
Swedish multinational telecommunications giant, among the world’s largest holders of standard-essential patents (SEPs) in mobile communications.
Patents at Issue
This landmark case involved two granted U.S. patents covering communication configuration selection technology, a foundational capability in modern wireless network design:
- • US11076304B2 — Directed to communication configuration selection technology governing how wireless devices select and manage configuration parameters.
- • US11711706B2 — A related patent addressing similar communication configuration selection functionality, likely covering improvements or continuations.
Developing similar wireless technology?
Check if your communication configuration design might infringe these or related patents.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
The investigation was terminated by settlement, with no damages award, no exclusion order, and no Commission findings on the merits of infringement or patent validity. The specific terms of the settlement — including any licensing arrangements, cross-licensing provisions, or financial consideration — were not publicly disclosed, which is typical for ITC settlements between large technology companies with overlapping IP portfolios.
Key Legal Issues
The case was initiated as a straightforward infringement action under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Motorola Mobility bore the burden of demonstrating valid and enforceable patent claims, importation of accused products, and infringement by Ericsson’s technology.
While the settlement produces no binding precedent, several legally significant observations emerge:
- ITC as a strategic lever: Motorola Mobility’s use of the ITC, with its exclusion remedy and accelerated timeline, likely created meaningful settlement pressure against Ericsson’s imported network equipment.
- Continuation patent strategy: The relationship between US11076304B2 and US11711706B2 demonstrates a deliberate portfolio prosecution approach.
- No PTAB challenge on record: The absence of a reported inter partes review (IPR) petition from Ericsson during this period may reflect a strategic choice to focus resources on ITC defense.
Filing a wireless communication patent?
Learn from this case. Use AI to draft stronger claims that can withstand litigation.
Power Your Patent Strategy with Eureka IP
From novelty searches to patent drafting, Eureka’s AI-powered tools help you navigate the patent landscape with confidence.
⚠️ Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in wireless communication design. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- View the 2 patents at issue in this technology space
- See which companies are most active in wireless communication patents
- Understand claim construction patterns
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
Communication configuration selection technology
2 Patents at Issue
In wireless communication space
Settlement Strategy
Common for complex telecom disputes
✅ Key Takeaways
For Patent Attorneys & Litigators
ITC Section 337 remains a high-leverage forum for wireless technology patent assertions, particularly where defendants import accused products.
Search related case law →Continuation patent families create multilayered infringement exposure that complicates invalidity defenses.
Explore precedents →For R&D Leaders
Conduct FTO analysis at the patent family level, not individual patent level, for wireless communication configuration features.
Start FTO analysis for my product →Early ITC exclusion risk assessment is non-negotiable for products dependent on imported components.
Try AI patent drafting →Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join thousands of IP professionals using Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyze competitive landscapes.