Context:
- For the complex procedural situation in Onesta’s dispute with BMW, which comprises two Munich lawsuits over U.S. patents and a related action brought by BMW in the Western District of Texas, we refer you to our January 17, 2026 article on the decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to stay the enforcement of Judge Alan D. Albright’s (United States District Court for the Western District of Texas) antisuit injunction for now. A decision on a further stay will be made based on briefing that will follow the issuance of Judge Albright’s written decision.
- Broadcom’s new Germany-wide injunction against Renault (February 6, 2026 ip fray article; follow-up on Broadcom being the world’s first trillion-dollar “patent troll”: February 7, 2026 ip fray article) will not inflame fellow car maker BMW’s desire to defend itself in that court.
What’s new: Below you can find new filings by BMW (in the Western District of Texas), Onesta (opposing a motion BMW filed in Munich on Monday (February 2, 2026) and informing the Munich court of BMW’s U.S. action targeting the Munich proceedings), and a joint Onesta-Qualcomm filing (with the United States International Trade Commission (USITC or ITC)). While Onesta has reached a principal agreement with Qualcomm on a patent agreement, it opposes a further extension of Qualcomm customer BMW’s deadline to respond to the Munich lawsuits over U.S. patents.
To Read The Full Story
Continue reading your article with a Membership
Courts and counsel
BMW v. Onesta (case no. 6:25-cv-00581, W.D. Tex.; PI appeal: case no. 2026-1338, Fed. Cir.)
The case was initally assigned to United States District Judge Kathleen Cardone. BMW’s complaint suggested that it should ideally be assigned to Judge Alan D. Albright, which indeed happened.
Counsel for BMW: Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner’s Lionel M. Lavenue, J. Derek McCorquindale (both of Reston, VA), Matthew C. Berntsen, Yi Yang (both of Boston, MA), and Aaron L. Parker, Joseph M. Myles, David T. Faurie, and Victor M. Palace (all four of Washington, DC).
Onesta has presumably anticipated this course of action, which is why it involved U.S. counsel early on. The Mintz firm advised Onesta with a view to the Munich filing. In the Western District of Texas, the following attorneys entered appearances on Onesta’s behalf:
- Cherry Johnson Siegmund and James’s Mark D. Siegmund, and
- Caldwell Cassady Curry’s Jason D. Cassady, J. Austin Curry, Daniel R. Pearson, and Aisha Mahmood Haley.
To its opposition brief in district court, Onesta attached an expert report written by Professor Peter Georg Picht, who is the chair of Zurich University’s Center for Intellectual Property & Competition Law (CIPCO), an Affiliated Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, and the President of ASCOLA, the international Academic Society for Competition Law. He also taught/teaches at King’s College London, the European University Institute (Florence), the Centre for International Intellectual Property Studies (Strasbourg), and the Max Planck Institute in Munich.
Onesta v. BMW (Munich I Regional Court cases nos. 21 O 13056/25 and 21 O 13057/25)
Presiding Judge: On February 1, 2026, Judge Dr. Hubertus Schacht, who is presently sitting by designation on the regional appeals court, the Oberlandesgericht München (Munich Higher Regional Court), will become the 21st Civil Chamber’s Presiding Judge (January 16, 2026 ip fray article).
Onesta is being represented in Munich by Peterreins Schley Patent- und Rechtsanwälte’s Dr. Thomas Adam, Dr. Simon Reuter, Dr. Claudia Feller, and Dr. Jan-Malte Schley.
A sworn declaration by Finnegan’s Dr. Johannes Druschel was attached to the U.S. antisuit motion. But BMW’s go-to counsel in German patent litigation (and frequently also counsel for Qualcomm, whose chips are at issue) is the Bardehle Pagenberg firm (ip fray firm profile with numerous achievements). The following Bardehle team is defending BMW and, by extension, Qualcomm in Munich against Onesta:
- Attorneys-at-law Professor Dr. Tilman Mueller-Stoy (“Müller-Stoy” in German), Dr. Martin Drews, and Dr. Tomasz Klama.
- Patent attorneys Dr. Patrick Heckeler, Dr. Christian Haupt, Michael Horndasch, Max Link, and Dr. Maximilian Vieweg.
Two renowned patent law scholars also provided testimony in support of BMW’s motion in district court: Professor Margo A. Bagley of Emory University, who has also been a faculty lecturer at the Max Planck Institute’s Munich Intellectual Property Law Center since 2012, and Professor Matthias Leistner of Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University.
In the Matter of Certain Integrated Circuits, Electronic Devices Containing the Same, and Components Thereof (ITC inv. no. 337-TA-1450)
Administrative Law Judge: Monica Bhattacharyya.
Counsel for Onesta: Mintz’s Michael T. Renaud, Adam S. Rizk, Samuel F. Davenport, William Meunier, Marguerite McConihe, Michael McNamara, Peter Snell, Matthew A. Karambelas, Catherine Xu, Kumar Ravula, Sean Casey, Courtney Herndon, Paul Weinand, Laura Petrasky, Hannah M. Edge, and Yanyi Liu.
Counsel for Qualcomm: Polsinelli’s Deanna Tanner Okun (former ITC chair), Daniel F. Smith, Lauren E. Peterson, and Sean M. Wesp; as well as Jones Day’s William E. Devitt, Marc S. Blackman, Matthew J. Hertko, Kristina N. Hendricks, Vishal V. Khatri, Jennifer L. Swize, Yury Kalish, and Keith Davis.