In a case involving the first time a federal district court judge determined a FRAND royalty rate for standard essential patents as reported in ITC Section 337 Update dated October 3, 2013, Motorola’s Appeal No. 14-35393 of a subsequent jury verdict that Motorola breached its FRAND royalty obligation to license its standard essential patents to Microsoft on fair terms was Argued before the Ninth Circuit on Wednesday, April 18, 2015. Motorola contends that it never consented to District Court Judge James L. Robert of the Western District of Washington ruling on a FRAND royalty rate in a bench trial and then having that royalty rate and corresponding findings become case precedent in a subsequent jury trial to determine whether Motorola breached its FRAND obligation. Motorola argued this “biased the jury trial” because the jury was told the FRAND royalty rate is a “miniscule fraction of the rate” offered by Motorola of 2.25 percent of the sales price of every Microsoft Xbox, PC/laptop, smartphone, etc. Motorola is seeking to reverse the $15 million damages judgment or, in the alternative, order a new trial. An issue under consideration by the Ninth Circuit panel comprised of Chief Judge Sidney Thomas, Judges Clifford Wallace, and Marsha Benzon, who took the parties’ arguments under submission, is whether Motorola timely objected to the evidence concerning the FRAND royalty rate submitted to the jury. This Update will continue to monitor the Ninth Circuit’s decision.