Apple pushes back against Powermat’s Qi SEP assertions with FRAND actions in U.S. and UK, trying to undermine UPC and German jurisdiction

Context:

• Israel’s Powermat is an active enforcer of standard-essential patents (SEPs) on the Qi wireless charging standard. It brought infringement lawsuits against Anker last year in the Unified Patent Court (UPC). Anker has meanwhile taken a license, settling the dispute.
• Powermat went on to sue Apple in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas over three Qi patents on February 11, 2026, alleging years of hold-out. The case has meanwhile been reassigned to Judge Alan D. Albright, who has previously presided over Powermat cases (against DAK Technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a Choetech, Nanami, and Yootech).
• Apple used to avoid UK jurisdiction over global FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing) rates. It supported Huawei and ZTE against Unwired Planet and Conversant before the UK Supreme Court (UKSC). It later got sued by Optis (part of the same group, PanOptis, as Unwired). In that dispute, a lawyer representing Apple famously suggested in open court that Apple might leave the UK market if an excessive global FRAND rate was set there. Last year, Apple appealed a $700M license fee award to the UKSC, which granted the petition to appeal (November 6, 2025 ip fray article). The UKSC hearing will take place from June 29 to July 1, 2026.
• Another Big Tech company, Amazon, has been trying for several months to leverage the English courts against research and licensing firm InterDigital (March 9, 2026 ip fray article). Amazon filed ten documents with the UPC last Wednesday, the deadline for proving its compliance with an anti-interference injunction (AII). The UPC’s Mannheim Local Division (LD), which merely wants to ensure that patentees can enforce their rights in the UPC (and enforce potential UPC judgments) without fear of damages claims or other coercive factors in the UK, has not reacted yet, at least not formally.

What’s new: On Friday, Apple simultaneously filed FRAND actions against Powermat in the Western District of Texas as well as the High Court of Justice for England & Wales. As explained below, Apple’s FRAND complaints overlap substantively though not terms of the formal prayers for relief, and the UK case is undoubtedly designed to undermine the UPC’s (and potentially also the Munich I Regional Court and/or Dusseldorf Regional Court’s) jurisdiction. In those continental European jurisdictions, a FRAND defense may be unavailable for the reasons discussed below.