Qualcomm secured a much-needed legal win in its battle with Arm, with a jury deciding the company’s chips are properly licensed under its agreement with Arm.

Arm and Qualcomm’s legal issues started when the latter purchased Nuvia, a semiconductor design firm founded by ex-Apple engineers. Nuvia, like Qualcomm, was an Arm licensee. Qualcomm used Nuvia’s designs as the basis for its new Snapdragon line of chips, which power Microsoft’s first-gen Copilot PCs.

Arm accused Qualcomm of transferring Nuvia’s license to itself without seeking Arm’s permission, something that goes against Arm’s licensing terms. As a result, Arm sued Qualcomm and eventually revoked its license altogether.

Qualcomm has maintained that its existing license covers its acquisition and use of Nuvia’s intellectual property.

“Arm’s complaint ignores the fact that Qualcomm has broad, well-established license rights covering its custom-designed CPU’s, and we are confident those rights will be affirmed,” Ann Chaplin, General Counsel of Qualcomm, said in a statement at the time.

A jury agreed with Qualcomm, saying the company’s Arm license covers its processors. The jury also found that Qualcomm did not violate its license with Arm.

“We are pleased with today’s decision,” Qualcomm said in a statement. “The jury has vindicated Qualcomm’s right to innovate and affirmed that all the Qualcomm products at issue in the case are protected by Qualcomm’s contract with ARM. We will continue to develop performance-leading, world class products that benefit consumers worldwide, with our incredible Oryon ARM-compliant custom CPUs.”

Unfortunately, the decision was not all good news, as the jury deadlocked on the question of whether Nuvia breached its contract with Arm. As a result of the deadlock, Arm has the option of asking for another trial, which the company has said it will do, according to Reuters.

Judge Maryellen Noreika urged both parties to resolve their dispute outside of court, saying neither would likely win outright.

“I don’t think either side had a clear victory or would have had a clear victory if this case is tried again,” Judge Noreika told the parties.