In San Diego on March 16, 2022, Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt made Taction name its funders but held that Apple was "not entitled to production of any litigation funding agreements" it sought.
A San Diego jury returned a $5,721,961,750 verdict for Taction Technology against Apple on September 25, 2026. Three days later, Burford Capital told investors what it would be entitled to from that verdict, subject to a condition. Its SEC filing, Exhibit 99.1 said that "if the verdict amount were paid, as is, Burford's entitlement would be $1.4 billion." Judge Todd W. Robinson wrote in his September 29 order, "The Court has not yet entered final judgment in this case." Apple had spent years seeking the funding documents behind Burford's number, while the verdict itself still faced an October 16 motion deadline.
The verdict did not end the case. The jury found infringement and rejected Apple's invalidity defense, while finding no willfulness on either asserted patent, according to the verdict form and Judge Robinson's September 29 order. That order says the court has not yet entered final judgment. It gives either side until October 16 to file motions under Rule 50(b) or Rule 59. Burford said that conditional $1.4 billion would be split roughly equally between its balance sheet and its investment funds. No payment or final judgment had fixed that amount.
The fight over the documents began long before the jury. In a March 2022 order, Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt reported on her in camera review of the funding materials. The collection included agreements, correspondence, memoranda, and spreadsheets valuing the case and the asserted patents. Her discovery order required Taction to identify its litigation funders. It denied Apple's request for the agreements and valuation documents as protected work product. The court drew its line at the economics of the deal: Apple could identify the funders, but could not inspect the agreements and case valuations through that request.
The 9 sources behind this story: 8 court records and 1 SEC filing, each linked with what it shows. Free with the weekly Litigation Sentinel brief.
Apple tried the funders directly. It issued deposition subpoenas to Kenosha Investments LP and Gronostaj Investments LLC on September 7, 2022, according to Burkhardt's later order. The two nonparties appeared by name in their public motion to quash that November. The identity question was over. The subpoena fight was about what else Apple could obtain from the entities financing its opponent.
Burkhardt's July 2023 order records another disclosure. The court had required the funders to file a supplement identifying their relationship to Burford Capital LLC. They filed public and sealed versions in April. The order then quashed Apple's subpoenas. It also denied the funders' request that Apple pay their costs and fees. Apple got a name and a relationship put before the court. Its subpoenas reached none of the documents on the funders' privilege log.
Apple took that loss to Robinson. In January 2026, he overruled Apple's objection to Burkhardt's quash order, finding it was not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The earlier discovery ruling, the quash order, and the district judge's review left the funding documents outside what those requests had produced. None of those rulings required the funders to publish the price of their participation. Nor did they decide what Burford ultimately receives from a verdict that, as of Judge Robinson's September 29 order, had not become a final judgment.
Free weekly intelligence for executives responsible for litigation exposure: the named decision-makers, dollar exposure, operating consequence, and next development.
Then the parties took funding out of the trial presentation. Robinson's August 11 order on their agreed motion states: "The Parties agree not to present any evidence, testimony, or argument regarding the funding or funders of this litigation." The order does not show what any juror actually heard. It does show that both sides asked the court to keep the subject out of their presentations.
Burford Capital, previously seen in the Sysco settlement-veto dispute through Kenosha, now has a conditional figure attached to a much larger verdict. In a filing Kenosha joined in that earlier dispute, the respondents described themselves as special purpose financing vehicles managed by Burford Capital LLC. The Apple docket named Kenosha and required an account of the funders' relationship to Burford. Burford's September filing supplied the number the discovery rulings had not produced publicly. Its release says the ultimate entitlement, if any, also depends on financing terms, fees, expenses, taxes, and other deductions. Those terms remain the critical unknown in the public record described by these orders.
The contrast now sits inside two documents with different audiences. The jury form gives Taction a damages figure against Apple. Burford's filing gives investors a conditional figure for Burford. The court orders explain why a defendant seeking the funding agreement did not get it through those discovery fights. They do not turn Burford's conditional figure into a payment. Burford itself warned that few large patent verdicts survive post-verdict review intact. That was Burford's caution to investors, not a ruling on this one.
The discovery fight produced names, a public Burford connection, and three rulings that left the agreement protected. The verdict produced a number Burford was willing to discuss with investors, with an express condition attached. The next move belongs to the parties in San Diego: Judge Robinson's order sets October 16, 2026, for any Rule 50(b) or Rule 59 motion. The agreement's terms still matter if that verdict survives. First, the verdict must survive.
The Executive Briefing has five questions about your reported litigation practices. Use the summary to choose an operating question to explore.
Take the Executive Briefing →Free weekly intelligence for executives responsible for litigation exposure: the named decision-makers, dollar exposure, operating consequence, and next development.