Judge calls Apple motion to reconsider Motorola ruling 'troubling'

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014


U.S. Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner shot down Apple's motion to reconsider a ruling of a Motorola patent case, writing that the document's two main arguments are founded on "flagrant misreadings" of the March 29 order.



Judge Posner's order of denial, issued on Friday, comes after Apple won a number of key patent claims regarding touchscreen heuristics in its case against Motorola, reports The Verge



Although the court's claim construction ruling upheld certain claims of Apple's '949 patent, the Cupertino, Calif., company wasn't satisfied with the order's scope and requested Judge Posner to reconsider his findings.



Specifically, Apple's lawyers claimed that "the Court incorrectly concluded that 'there is no basis in either the claim language or the diagrams and descriptions’ for a finger swipe as a structure corresponding to the ‘next item’ heuristic." The request went on to say "the Court erroneously found that a horizontal finger swipe cannot be both a ‘next item’ heuristic (claim 1) and a ‘horizontal screen scroll’ heuristic (claim 10)."



As for Apple's first claim, Judge Posner stated that the quote was taken from another portion of the order and had no bearing on the iPhone maker's argument. He writes that "Apple perceives disagreement where there is none. There can be no substantive response to this argument of Apple’s, for it argues not against my order but against Apple’s mirage of that order."



Apple's second claim was similarly dismissed as irrelevant because it misinterpreted quotes from the March 29 order.



The denial order concedes that the final passage of Apple's motion containing photo manipulation contentions may hold some merit, though Judge Posner can't take the claim into consideration because it was not advanced during the patent construction briefing.



"By failing to raise this argument in claims construction briefing on the ‘949 patent, Apple has forfeited it," Judge Posner writes.



Near the conclusion of Judge Posner's March 30 order, he writes:

Quote:

Apple presumably spent a nontrivial amount of time drafting its order, and now I have done the same in responding to it. Yet it seems that Apple brought about this expenditure of scarce resources without first making a careful reading of the page or so of my order against which this motion is launched. Such inconsiderate sloppiness is unprofessional and unacceptable.



3 30 12 Posner Order







Overall, Apple's attempt to contest parts of the judge's original order was seen as slipshod. It is unclear why the company's attorneys would seek to oppose the previous order, or how they so blatantly misinterpreted the court's documented findings.





[ View article on AppleInsider ]

«13

Comments

  • quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,567member
    Keep at em, Apple.



    The longer the Motorola White Elephant is kicking around, the more BS will stand in the way *actual* innovation. Moto is now in patent-pimping mode, having failed in the market.
  • suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,115member
    Quote:

    Overall, Apple's attempt to contest parts of the judge's original order was seen as slipshod. It is unclear why the company's attorneys would seek to oppose the previous order, or how they so blatantly misinterpreted the court's documented findings.



    If Steve were around, he'd say, "You've tarnished Apple's reputation. You should all hate each other for having let each other down..."
  • SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 24,925member
    Fire the legal team or ask for a change of venue due to a prejudicial judge.
  • Quote:

    Apple presumably spent a nontrivial amount of time drafting its order, and now I have done the same in responding to it. Yet it seems that Apple brought about this expenditure of scarce resources without first making a careful reading of the page or so of my order against which this motion is launched. Such inconsiderate sloppiness is unprofessional and unacceptable.





    Inconsiderate sloppiness. Unprofessional. Unacceptable.





    Why does Apple think that a judge will put up with these sort of tactics?



    the RDF worked for Steve in the context where he was the undisputed boss. Likely it works for the suits when they start waving a checkbook around.



    But in a court of law, it is, as Hizzoner said, unacceptable.



    Do they take the man for a fool? Do they think he will just throw up his hands and concede to them? Are they nuts?
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Near the conclusion of Judge Posner's March 30 order, he writes:



    Overall, Apple's attempt to contest parts of the judge's original order was seen as slipshod. It is unclear why the company's attorneys would seek to oppose the previous order, or how they so blatantly misinterpreted the court's documented findings.[/URL]



    It is possible that Apple's attorneys simply messed up.



    OTOH, it is also possible that they did this for strategic reasons. There are several plausible ones, but one of the biggies would be to defuse Motorola's argument on appeal that the judge was biased in favor of Apple and did not adequately consider the relevant matters.



    Frankly, I think it's far more likely that Apple had a reason (whatever it was).
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    Inconsiderate sloppiness. Unprofessional. Unacceptable.





    Why does Apple think that a judge will put up with these sort of tactics?



    the RDF worked for Steve in the context where he was the undisputed boss. Likely it works for the suits when they start waving a checkbook around.



    But in a court of law, it is, as Hizzoner said, unacceptable.



    Do they take the man for a fool? Do they think he will just throw up his hands and concede to them? Are they nuts?



    Are you?



    You obviously don't know what happened other than a third hand version of it. You certainly were not involved in Apple's legal strategy discussions. There may well have been a good reason for what Apple did.



    Or maybe they didn't consider the issue important since they won most of the important arguments and did put an inexperienced attorney on it to get him some experience.



    One way or the other, given the choice between accepting that Apple's legal team knows what they're doing or accepting that you know better than they do, you lose.
  • alienzedalienzed Posts: 393member
    Am I the only one who found this article rather confusing in all respects?



    It seems like Apple, the Judge and the writer of this article were all on crazy pills.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,072member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    It is possible that Apple's attorneys simply messed up.



    OTOH, it is also possible that they did this for strategic reasons. There are several plausible ones, but one of the biggies would be to defuse Motorola's argument on appeal that the judge was biased in favor of Apple and did not adequately consider the relevant matters.



    Frankly, I think it's far more likely that Apple had a reason (whatever it was).



    You really think they were more likely to intentionally be irritating Judge Posner and wasting his time rather than just plain screwing up? They certainly made an impression on him and not a good one according the Judge's answer.
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,192member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    You really think they were more likely to intentionally be irritating Judge Posner and wasting his time ....



    You sound like you have a view on who Judge Posner is: care to share?
  • alienzedalienzed Posts: 393member
    Isn't it possible that the Judge actually misunderstood, he says: "Apple sees disagreement where there is none."

    Uh, wouldn't Apple best be able to judge if they were in disagreement? Who is Posner to say that they don't in fact disagree?



    God forbid he not understand the technological implications of what Apple is putting forth.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,072member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    You sound like you have a view on who Judge Posner is: care to share?



    He's regarded as one of the most brilliant and well-respected jurists in the US. The most cited legal scholar of the century with numerous books to his credit, Florian Mueller refers to him as a "rockstar" in the legal community. He's certainly not your run-of-the-mill Judge according to every article I can find on him.



    it wouldn't hurt for you to do a little research on him if you haven't heard of him before.
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    He's regarded as one of the most brilliant and well-respected jurists in the US. The most cited legal scholar of the century with numerous books to his credit, Florian Mueller refers to him as a "rockstar" in the legal community. He's certainly not your run-of-the-mill Judge according to every article I can find on him.



    Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made.



    You have no way of knowing if Apple messed up or if they had a reason for filing the motion. Or whether perhaps Posner messed up and didn't understand Apple's filing.



    But, of course, that won't stop you from your silly Apple-hating attacks.
  • jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    You really think they were more likely to intentionally be irritating Judge Posner and wasting his time rather than just plain screwing up? They certainly made an impression on him and not a good one according the Judge's answer.



    So?



    Obviously, you don't understand the legal process. They've gotten as far as they can with Posner. The decision is made and there's no reason to play nice with him. Since Motorola will undoubtedly appeal, Apple's focus right now is on the appeal, not Posner's decision. If Apple can do something to strengthen their position for the appeal, they lose nothing by irritating Posner.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,072member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Which has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made.



    You have no way of knowing if Apple messed up or if they had a reason for filing the motion. Or whether perhaps Posner messed up and didn't understand Apple's filing.



    But, of course, that won't stop you from your silly Apple-hating attacks.



    It was your "likely Apple had a reason" that I was questioning so it has everything to do with the point you made.
  • schmidm77schmidm77 Posts: 223member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    He's regarded as one of the most brilliant and well-respected jurists in the US. The most cited legal scholar of the century with numerous books to his credit, Florian Mueller refers to him as a "rockstar" in the legal community. He's certainly not your run-of-the-mill Judge according to every article I can find on him.



    it wouldn't hurt for you to do a little research on him if you haven't heard of him before.



    And the preeminent mind in the use of economic analysis in the application of the law. I have read many of his published papers in the course of studying economics.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,072member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    So?



    Obviously, you don't understand the legal process. They've gotten as far as they can with Posner. The decision is made and there's no reason to play nice with him. Since Motorola will undoubtedly appeal, Apple's focus right now is on the appeal, not Posner's decision. If Apple can do something to strengthen their position for the appeal, they lose nothing by irritating Posner.



    I don't believe you understand the legal process if you think intentionally irritating the judge who will be ruling on the merits of your case and closely examining the rest of your arguments is a proven legal manuever. IMHO it's much more likely to be series of misunderstandings from Apple legal than part of some brilliant intentional plan to try and appear incompetent and wasteful of the court's time.



    I think this isn't so much a reflection on Apple itself, but serves more a a reason for Apple's management to take a hard look at their representation in Posner's courtroom to assure this stays an isolated error.
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,192member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    He's regarded as one of the most brilliant and well-respected jurists in the US. The most cited legal scholar of the century with numerous books to his credit, Florian Mueller refers to him as a "rockstar" in the legal community. He's certainly not your run-of-the-mill Judge according to every article I can find on him.



    it wouldn't hurt for you to do a little research on him if you haven't heard of him before.



    Oh, I knew that. I've read many of his writings too, in the law and economics arena. You should check those out, if you haven't.



    I was making sure that you knew what you were commenting on (which is not the case, often). And, that you know this judge has sided with Apple so far in just about every ruling.



    Just wanted to get a quote from you about this guy that I can hold up, when the inevitable happens, i.e., Apple wins.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 15,072member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    I was making sure that you knew what you were commenting on (which is not the case, often).



    I think part of what irritates you is I usually do know what I'm commenting on and prepared to prove it when inevitably questioned.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    ... It is unclear why the company's attorneys would seek to oppose the previous order, or how they so blatantly misinterpreted the court's documented findings.

    ...



    Talk about slipshod ...



    This section is really bad writing/reporting from Apple Insider. You either need an "allegedly" in there, an "according to the judge," or ... you need to actually back up this statement if it's Apple Insider that's asserting it.



    Please, please, consider getting a real editor that knows how to write legibly in English to proofread all the stuff you people post on this site.
  • mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 6,900member
    Go sit in on court sessions for corporations, civil suits including divorce court and criminal court.



    You'll walk away feeling like a ton of slime was just dumped on you, especially in criminal court.



    The verbal sparrings/bashings come from both sides and the judge that presides.



    It's not for the thin skinned.
Sign In or Register to comment.