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

iphone 16 teal

Siri Settlement Approved: Apple to Pay Owners of Some iPhone Models

Friday July 24, 2026 8:10 am PDT by
In May, Apple agreed to pay $250 million to settle a U.S. class action lawsuit over Siri AI's delayed launch, and eligible iPhone users could receive up to a $95 payout. Apple's settlement has now received preliminary approval from a judge, according to a July 17 court document. However, there is no settlement website yet, and it may take months before eligible customers can begin submitting ...
apple bitcoin app scam

Apple Responds to Lawsuit Over Fake Bitcoin Wallet Scam in App Store

Monday July 27, 2026 6:00 am PDT by
Apple is facing a new lawsuit from three customers who allegedly lost a combined $1.8 million after falling victim to a fake Bitcoin wallet app in the App Store, according to a complaint filed in California federal court on Friday. The complaint alleges that Apple violated California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act and other laws by failing to adequately review and monitor apps distributed...
OpenAI vs Apple Feature

OpenAI President on Apple Lawsuit: We Don't Need Your Secrets

Wednesday July 29, 2026 1:45 pm PDT by
OpenAI president Greg Brockman recently did an interview with Joanna Stern, where he commented on the lawsuit OpenAI is facing from Apple and talked about OpenAI's product plans. Brockman reiterated what OpenAI has already said on the record, stating that the company is "plenty innovative" and uninterested in other companies' trade secrets. I would say that we have no interest in other...

Top Rated Comments

AngerDanger Avatar
103 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
103 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
103 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
103 months ago
Common sense prevailed.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
103 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
103 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)