Xiaomi seeks UK FRAND ruling in ASUS, Innovative Sonic SEP dispute

Context: In February, ASUSTeK and its affiliate Innovative Sonic sued Xiaomi in the Munich I Regional Court over the alleged infringement of EP2802185 (Method and Apparatus for Adding Serving Cells in a Wireless Communication System: February 6, 2025 ip fray article), before targeting OPPO over the same patent two months later (April 4, 2025 ip fray article).

What’s new: Xiaomi has hit back against ASUSTeK and Innovative Sonic by seeking a FRAND ruling in the High Court of Justice for England & Wales (EWHC) (case file: HP-2025-000046).

Direct impact: This move by Xiaomi is something it has employed before; notably, in Panasonic v. Xiaomi, where the former filed an infringement claim in the UK, as well as the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and Germany. When Xiaomi then sought an interim licence declaration, which was ultimately granted by the England & Wales Court of Appeal (ECWA: October 3, 2024 ip fray article), this became key in the parties’ settlement last year, as it rendered the parallel UPC and Germany cases redundant (October 25, 2024 ip fray article). ASUSTeK also recently filed a FRAND action in the EWHC against (July 22, 2025 LinkedIn post by ip fray) Nokia in a case that Nokia started in the UPC and Germany.

Wider ramifications: ASUSTek has historically been seen as a defendant to standard-essential patent (SEP) infringement lawsuits, with Nokia targeting it in its most recent actions in Germany and the UPC (April 1, 2025 ip fray article), the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) (April 11, 2025 ip fray article), and India (June 26, 2025 ip fray article). However, as its actions against Xiaomi and OPPO show, it is now leveraging more and more on the global SEP litigation stage. ASUSTeK is also currently embroiled in a dispute with Lenovo, in which it gained an important win in the ITC in June (June 23, 2025 ip fray article), and also sued OPPO and Xiaomi over a second patent (EP3346616: “Method and Apparatus for Beam Management in Wireless Communication Systems”) in the UPC’s Munich Local Division (LD) in June.

The logical next step would be for ASUS to grant Xiaomi an interim license, as it can’t seek one from Nokia while denying one to Xiaomi in the same court. The mere fact that Xiaomi had to sue to obtain an interim license in the first place ups the ante for ASUS against Nokia.