Qualcomm’s $4 Billion Exchange Offer

Cravath represented QUALCOMM Incorporated in connection with its $4 billion revolving credit. QUALCOMM Incorporated is a global leader in the development and commercialization of foundational technologies for the wireless industry. The transaction closed on August 8, 2024.

On September 26, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted summary judgment in favor of Cravath client Qualcomm Incorporated in a putative class action alleging violations of antitrust laws. Originally brought in 2017 on behalf of an alleged nationwide class of mobile device purchaser plaintiffs, the multi-district litigation consolidated numerous complaints against Qualcomm and followed a related Federal Trade Commission action against the company (FTC v. Qualcomm), which also resulted in a complete judgment for Qualcomm on appeal in 2020.

On June 16, 2017, the Delaware Court of Chancery dismissed a stockholder derivative lawsuit brought against current and former directors and officers of Qualcomm Incorporated alleging, among other claims, that defendants breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly failing to prevent purported FCPA violations by the company. In granting the dismissal, Vice Chancellor Tamika R. Montgomery‑Reeves held that the complaint did not plead sufficient facts to infer that the individual defendants had acted in bad faith or that the directors faced a substantial likelihood of personal liability such that plaintiffs’ failure to make a demand on the board to bring a suit was excused.

On September 6, 2011, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation granted Cravath client Qualcomm Inc.’s request to centralize 11 lawsuits over PJC Logistics LLC’s vehicle tracking patent in Minnesota Federal Court. PJC alleged that certain mobile fleet management products manufactured by Qualcomm, and installed on hundreds of thousands of trucks and other vehicles, infringe U.S. Patent No. 5,223,844. In March 2011, PJC brought actions in nine district courts against hundreds of customers of fleet management products. In April 2011, Qualcomm filed a declaratory judgment action in the District of Minnesota alleging that the patent is invalid and not infringed by Qualcomm’s products. PJC subsequently filed additional infringement actions against Qualcomm and other suppliers of allegedly infringing fleet management systems in Texas. Qualcomm moved the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to transfer all the actions to the District of Minnesota for coordinated pre-trial proceedings. After oral argument in July 2011, Qualcomm’s motion was granted.