U.S. International Trade Commission Declines to Block iPhone Imports in Ongoing Apple v. Qualcomm Case - MacRumors
Skip to Content

U.S. International Trade Commission Declines to Block iPhone Imports in Ongoing Apple v. Qualcomm Case

The United States International Trade Commission will not be blocking imports of the iPhone in the ongoing Apple v. Qualcomm case, reports Reuters.

Qualcomm had asked the ITC to ban imports of the AT&T and T-Mobile iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 8, iPhone 8 Plus, and iPhone X models that use chips from Intel, citing multiple patent violations.

qualcomm iphone 7
Qualcomm did not ask for a ban on iPhones that use Qualcomm LTE chips, with the reasoning that a more limited exclusion order was more likely to be granted.

An ITC judge said on Friday that while Apple's iPhones infringe on a patent related to power management technology, a ban will not be put in place. The judge cited "public interest factors" as one of the reasons why the court ruled against Qualcomm.

Neither Apple nor Qualcomm have commented on the decision as of yet, but it marks a major victory for Apple in its months-long legal battle with Qualcomm.

The two companies have been embroiled in an increasingly tense legal feud that kicked off in January 2017. Qualcomm and Apple have filed several more than a dozen lawsuits against one another since then.

Apple has accused Qualcomm of charging unfair royalties for "technologies they have nothing to do with," while Qualcomm claims that its inventions form the "very core" of modern mobile communication.

Earlier this week, Qualcomm further escalated the dispute by accusing Apple of providing confidential trade information and trade secrets stolen from Qualcomm to Intel.

Popular Stories

Jon Prosser Rainbow

Jon Prosser Still Not Fully Cooperating in Apple's iOS 26 Trade Secrets Lawsuit

Tuesday April 14, 2026 6:57 am PDT by
A joint status report filed yesterday in Apple's trade secrets lawsuit against YouTuber Jon Prosser and Michael Ramacciotti shows Prosser is still failing to comply with discovery, prompting Apple to seek a court order to compel him. The latest filing, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California yesterday, covers developments since the parties' last update in ...
app store blue banner epic 1

Epic Games Wins Reversal of Stay in App Store Fee Legal Battle

Wednesday April 29, 2026 5:05 am PDT by
Apple will not be able to delay a district court battle over fee calculations while it waits to hear whether the U.S. Supreme Court will weigh in on the latest developments in its long-running dispute with Epic Games. On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an earlier decision letting Apple keep its current zero-fee link-out commission structure in place while it appeals to...
Second Generation AirTag Feature Purple

Apple Faces Dozens of Lawsuits Over AirTag Stalking After Class Action Denied

Friday May 1, 2026 2:39 pm PDT by
Apple is facing over 30 lawsuits from people who claim to have been stalked using Apple AirTags. The filings come after an AirTag lawsuit from 2022 (Hughes v. Apple) failed to get class certification. In each filing, Apple is accused of releasing the AirTag while being aware that it could be "purchased and used by abusive, dangerous individuals, to track, coerce, control, and otherwise...

Top Rated Comments

AngerDanger Avatar
99 months ago
I can't help but think of that terrible Batman v Superman film whenever I see the names of court cases anymore.



Attachment Image
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
velocityg4 Avatar
99 months ago
Sorry Qualcomm. Apple is now a big part of the US economy. As far as a single company is concerned anyway. Their sales and profit volume are too important. It would take a lot more than a simple patent dispute to convince the government to stop imports. Their net income is double your net sales. With Apple switching to Intel for their modems. Your net sales are going way down.

Even if Apple loses and has to pay. It will be many years from now. The victory will be a pyrrhic victory.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Quu Avatar
99 months ago
The judge cited "public interest factors" as one of the reasons why the court ruled against Qualcomm.
Aka the iPhone is too popular to block so we won't be doing that.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
djcerla Avatar
99 months ago
Common sense prevailed.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
99 months ago
‘Public interest factors’.. or in other words a US company in the US, [...]
Qualcomm is an US company, too. But probably not as popular as Apple. :)
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
zorinlynx Avatar
99 months ago
Aka the iPhone is too popular to block so we won't be doing that.
Not just that, the case is still ongoing. Why shouldn't Apple be able to continue to sell their product until the case is decided?

Once that happens, the court can award damages if there are any, etc. But while the case is ongoing, blocking imports is ludicrous.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)