or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung hopes new jury trial with Apple will nullify patent infringement of 14 products
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung hopes new jury trial with Apple will nullify patent infringement of 14 products

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
With 40 percent of the billion-dollar patent infringement verdict against it put on hold, Samsung is now asking for the court to appoint a new jury to determine whether 14 of its products infringed Apple's products at all ? a move that could lead to a lower overall monetary judgment.

justice


In preparing to respond to Apple's request for an April 3 case management conference and near-term damages trial, Samsung according to FOSS Patents has asked permission to exceed the court's page limit for its response. Samsung's explanation for exceeding the page limit invokes the Seventh Amendment, claiming that a new jury cannot simply rely on a previous jury's decision to determine new damages for the 14 products vacated from the $1.05 billion verdict, but that they must determine whether the products actually infringed patents Apple holds.

"

f the Court declines to enter the partial final judgment and stay that Samsung has requested, and instead sets the case for immediate new trial [as Apple requested], the Seventh Amendment would require that the new jury retry certain liability issues along with the damages issues that are subject to the Court's new trial order. See, e.g., Gasoline Products Co. v. Champlin Ref. Co., 283 U.S. 494, 500-501 (1931) (a 'partial new trial?may not properly be resorted to unless it clearly appears that the issue to be retried is so distinct and separable from the others that a trial of it alone may be had without injustice. Here the question of damages on the counterclaim is so interwoven with that of liability that the former cannot be submitted to the jury independently of the latter without confusion and uncertainty, which would amount to a denial of a fair trial.')

In August, a jury awarded Apple a $1.05 billion verdict, finding that a wide range of Samsung products infringed on Apple design and software patents. Judge Koh in early March vacated $450 million of that verdict, finding that the jury had improperly awarded damages for 14 products and that new proceedings were necessary in order to establish the proper damages for those devices.

Apple, meanwhile, wants to make progress with regard to the damages already awarded, as well as to secure injunctive relief on infringing products. Judge Lucy Koh has previously denied Apple's requests for sales bans on products like the Galaxy Nexus. Samsung has played vigorous defense against Apple's appeals of Koh's decision.

Samsung has also indicated that, should Koh grant Apple's request for a partial final judgment, Samsung will file an immediate appeal of that decision and ask that that appeal be consolidated with Apple's appeal of the denial of a permanent injunction. Doing so would introduce a number of other issues into the process, likely pushing a final judgment much further into the future.
post #2 of 24

As opposed to hoping they'd have their guilt reaffirmed and have to pay three times the damages for forcing Apple to wait longer.


Samsung's explanation for exceeding the page limit invokes the Seventh Amendment, claiming that a new jury cannot simply rely on a previous jury's decision to determine new damages for the 14 products vacated from the $1.05 billion verdict, but that they must determine whether the products actually infringed patents Apple holds.

 

Sounds wrong to me. This is an appeal, not a retrial. You can't appeal an old decision without taking it into account, idiots.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #3 of 24
You gotta love our legal system: even when you think it's over, even when a jury of peers has decided, it really isn't.
post #4 of 24
Obfuscate, quibble, parse; Samsung does whatever it can to slow down the process of justice, making the ultimate restitution no more effective than a slap on the wrist. The judge, if she were really interested in serviing the cause of justice, would call a halt to this sham of a trial. Samsung was found with its hand in the cookie jar. It's time to mete out sufficient punishment to get them to stop this behavior.
post #5 of 24
Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post
It's time to mete out sufficient punishment to get them to stop this behavior.

 

And $1,000,000,000 isn't sufficient punishment.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #6 of 24
So a new jury can't copy the previous one's decisions? Suck it up, Sammy.
post #7 of 24

There's no reason why Samsung shouldn't try for another bite at the Apple.  If the judge denies the request then that just gives them another issue for appeal.  And they are clearly going to drag this out as long as possible.  My bet, though, is that the judge doesn't buy it and pushes on with the trial on damages.  The only certainty is that there will be plenty of billable hours for both sides.
 

post #8 of 24
I think part of the problem is the judge. The jury had its say and the judge refused to abide by it. Even though the jury found for Apple, I believe the judge has sided with Samsung more times than with Apple. The fact she vacated part of the verdict shows that. Is she now an expert in everything presented at the trial? Were any of the jurists experts? If they had experts, Samsung would have been hung a long time ago but that's not how the trial system works in the US because "experts" are bought all the time. We rely on normal citizens to use their best judgement to hear both sides, then make a decision. They did that and we have to live with it. This isn't a murder trial and everyone already knows Samsung took most of its ideas from Apple. Let's move on.
post #9 of 24
Originally Posted by wshuff4 View Post
If the judge denies the request then that just gives them another issue for appeal.

 

So you can appeal infinitely? I don't think so. We'd still be going over court cases from the 1800s.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #10 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by wshuff4 View Post

If the judge denies the request then that just gives them another issue for appeal.

So you can appeal infinitely? I don't think so. We'd still be going over court cases from the 1800s.

Samsung, to their lawyers' credit, appears to gave taken it to a new level.

The judge is weak, and they're playing her like a cheap violin. It's embarrassing to watch. I realize I am badly mixing metaphors, but let's see if she has the cajones to throw it out on its b***.
post #11 of 24
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
…let's see if she has the cajones to throw it out on its b***.

 

Oh, she doesn't. Her recent decision to ignore what the jury said and split up the ruling speaks to that.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #12 of 24

No, you can't appeal forever, but this case has become incredibly complex.  In general a party can only appeal after a final judgment.  Here, there were a series of post-trial motions and the judge decided that the jury used the wrong formula for calculating some of the damages.  Hence, where we are now, with a new trial for damages on the horizon. 

 

If you notice, Samsung has informed the judge that if the decision on this issue goes against it, then it will file an immediate interlocutory appeal. Occasionally there are issues that are so important to the ultimate outcome that an appeal is allowed before a final judgment.  If Samsung is permitted to file an immediate appeal as it has threatened to do, then that would slow things down even more, which I imagine is part of the plan.  After all, if the ITC or some other federal court invalidates some of the Apple patents at issue here that could alter things.  At some point, however, the case with Judge Koh will come to an end and there will be a final judgment that encompasses liability and all damages.  At that point, the actual appeal of the case can proceed to the Court of Appeals.  Just with all the legal maneuvering going on right now, that point seems to be far in the future.

post #13 of 24
Originally Posted by wshuff4 View Post
…the judge decided that the jury used the wrong formula for calculating some of the damages.

 

Can she even do that, given that she didn't contest it immediately?


If you notice, Samsung has informed the judge that if the decision on this issue goes against it, then it will file an immediate interlocutory appeal.

 

"Dismissed with prejudice." Come on, common sense! *shakes dice*

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #14 of 24

Still very curious when Samsung has to start writing checks for the base portion?

post #15 of 24
Originally Posted by Rob Bonner View Post
Still very curious when Samsung has to start writing checks for the base portion?

 

Never.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #16 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

You gotta love our legal system: even when you think it's over, even when a jury of peers has decided, it really isn't.

 

I know, I hate all that first world nonsense (you know, because functioning democracies all have appeals processes). Give me some failed state justice!

 

/s

 

 

On another note, even the $1 billion judgment would never have been enough. We need product bans for this kind of behavior. That's the only way IP enforcement will ever have any teeth.

2011 Macbook Pro, 2012 Macbook Air, iPhone 5, iPad 4

Reply

2011 Macbook Pro, 2012 Macbook Air, iPhone 5, iPad 4

Reply
post #17 of 24

The more time that goes by, the more people forget that Apple invented this stuff, and no one remembers what phones were like before iPhone, and it seems less like Samsung are copying and just doing what's normal. Dragging it out = bad news.

post #18 of 24
Apple legal costs: -$$$ millions.

Original award: $1.05 billion.

Samsung being guilty anyway: Priceless.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #19 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Oh, she doesn't. Her recent decision to ignore what the jury said and split up the ruling speaks to that.

The problem is that of the Judge calls BS, then Samsung appeals on a "biased judge".

That was played very successfully in the Microsoft antitrust trial. And while the app leaks judge there confirmed judge Jackson didn't do anything wrong, THEY also allowed the retrying to stand... And that was after Microsoft's lawyers publicly "slandered" the judge to the press.

So judges will grant these perpetual retrials so their whole case doesn't force the court to redo it. Meanwhile some kid on YouTube gets double punished for giving a tele-judge the actual finger once.
post #20 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

As opposed to hoping they'd have their guilt reaffirmed and have to pay three times the damages for forcing Apple to wait longer.

Sounds wrong to me. This is an appeal, not a retrial. You can't appeal an old decision without taking it into account, idiots.

This is a "correction" not an appeal. When the jury awarded "damages" they were GIVEN something like 20 pages of forms WRITTEN BY LAWYERS with dozens and dozens of phone models... And they had to fill in a bubble and write a "damage" amount. So the end result turned in to the judge was 40 separate awards, with a summary page. It's posted somewhere and it is so poorly written and confusing its difficult to even READ the result correctly.

That the JURY was manipulated in that manner is an even bigger miscarriage...

But anyway, the judge agreed some of the individual awards didn't make sense,(number of sales/patents infringed) so she is sending those lines back for review. So "reevaluating" the patents IS NOT kosher... It was just the amount of infringement... So it could be $0 but its not a NEW result.
post #21 of 24
Originally Posted by mabhatter View Post
When the jury awarded "damages" they were GIVEN something like 20 pages of forms WRITTEN BY LAWYERS with dozens and dozens of phone models... And they had to fill in a bubble and write a "damage" amount.

 

And?


That the JURY was manipulated in that manner…

 

How?

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #22 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And $1,000,000,000 isn't sufficient punishment.

Citation needed.
post #23 of 24
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post
Citation needed.

 

Revenue of all Samsung phones since 2009 - $1,000,000,000 = sufficient.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #24 of 24

There seems to be on Samsung and many who read about the 40% of the damages thrown out that Samsung can indeed get a new trial on the whole Jury Trial Case with the damages being thrown out.  This is just not the case.  The reason the 40% was thrown out was because the jury made mistakes calculating the damages owed for the items that were found to be infringed and Samsungs lawyers pointed that out.  So the judge ruled that the new trial was necessary to calculate the proper  damages only.  In fact if you follow the trial on Foss Patents and Scribed, Samsung may end up owing more to apple than at first if the calculations for the 40% come out in there favor.

 

The above is a separate trial from the Appeal Samsung has already filed to get all of the First Jury Trial changed or as much as possible.  Apple is appealing the parts of the first jury trial that they did not win as well.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung hopes new jury trial with Apple will nullify patent infringement of 14 products