Judge vacates 40% of jury's $1.05B verdict in Apple v. Samsung [u]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Judge Lucy Koh on Friday vacated more than 40 percent of the $1.05 billion in damages a jury awarded to Apple in its patent infringement case against chief rival Samsung.

Update: A complete list of devices affected by Friday's order have been included below.

Vanessa Blum, federal courts reporter for The Recorder in San Francisco tweeted on Friday that Judge Koh had struck roughly $450 million off the damage award Apple won in its case against Samsung. Koh has reportedly ordered a new trial for the $450 million.

Apple won the award in a sweeping victory at the end of a hotly contested trial. After just 22 hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict finding Samsung guilty of infringement on all but one of Apple's asserted patents. Apple had asked for roughly $2.5 billion in damages.

Apple, the jury found, had not violated any of the South Korean conglomerate's patents.

In the initial ruling, Samsung had been found to be willful in its infringement, which held the possibility of a tripling of the $1.05 billion award.

Apple had tried to sway Koh toward moving the damages award closer to its initial goal of $2.5 billion. According to Bloomberg, Koh rejected Apple's request for a bigger reward, saying that the amount Samsung owed was under dispute and the jury was under no obligation to side with either party's damage estimate.

"It is not the proper role of the court to second-guess the jury's factual determination as to the proper amount of compensation," Koh said, commenting on the ruling.

According to FOSS Patents, Judge Koh's order to vacate $450,514,650 from the judgment covers 14 Samsung products due to uncertainty over what amount of damages are attributable to an individual intellectual property right:
"The jury set only one damages figure per product, but half a dozen different intellectual property rights were found infringed, resulting in a lack of clarity..."
Judge Koh has not yet set a date for a second damages trial. When it is held, it may result in a higher or lower damages award for the Galaxy Prevail, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy SII AT&T, Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Tab, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, and Transform. The case will also require a different jury from the one that reached August's verdict.

Roughly $600 million of the initial verdict still stands.

Damages vacated for following Samsung products:
  • Captivate
  • Continuum
  • Droid Charge
  • Epic 4G
  • Exhibit 4G
  • Indulge
  • Infuse 4G
  • Galaxy Prevail
  • Gem
  • Galaxy SII for AT&T
  • Galaxy Tab
  • Nexus S 4G
  • Replenish
  • Transform
Damages remain for the following Samsung products:
  • Fascinate
  • Galaxy Ace
  • Galaxy S i9000
  • Galaxy S II i9100
  • Galaxy Tab 10.1 Wi-Fi
  • Galaxy Tab 10.1 with 4G LTE
  • Galaxy S 4G
  • Galaxy S II Showcase
  • Intercept
  • Galaxy S II Skyrockeet
  • Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch
  • Galaxy S II T-Mobile
  • Mesmerize
  • Vibrant
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 91
    fotoformatfotoformat Posts: 288member


    And in 4 months time, just like a certain British judge, will maybe pop-up consulting for Samescum?

  • Reply 2 of 91
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Lemme guess, Apple can't appeal that.

  • Reply 3 of 91
    bonkybonky Posts: 19member
    Bullshit. Completely expected.
  • Reply 4 of 91

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Lemme guess, Apple can't appeal that.



    What little blurb is there in the story, she's ordering a new trial for the portion she struck off, so it's not lost yet.

  • Reply 5 of 91
    I thought the amount would get reduced, so not surprised by this. Still surprised at the wilful infringement decision. That one still has me scratching my head.
  • Reply 6 of 91
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,587member


    Why wouldn't I be surprised if Apple loses the "new trial". What was wrong with the old trial? You know, the one that Apple already won?


     


    It does pay to be a crook though. Who says that crime is not profitable?


     


    You rip off a competitor's device, and even if you get sued and the case goes to trial, it'll drag on for years, and even if you lose, just try the case again! And even if you have to pay a few hundred million dollars, then so what? The profits that the crooks have made from their copying far exceeds any little damage fees that they might have to pay.


     


    It's like robbing a bank and making away with $10 million dollars. When you get caught, you wouldn't have to go to jail, but you would have to pay a fine of $1 million dollars, and you get to keep the rest. It's a win-win situation.

  • Reply 7 of 91
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member


    Stock down $11 now.  Couldn't be better news for Samsung with the S4 coming out in a few weeks.  *^%#!

  • Reply 8 of 91
    ub52209ub52209 Posts: 16member


    Deceiving headline. Should read "Judge orders retrial of $440 million of $1.05 B verdict" The way its written sounds like Apple had its judgment award reduced unconditionally.

  • Reply 9 of 91
    Next up in the news, Sir Robin Jacob and Lucy Koh are engaged to be married, the wedding will be paid for by Samsung and the honeymoon (permanent) will be in Korea.
  • Reply 10 of 91
    tooltalktooltalk Posts: 766member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bonky View Post



    Bullshit. Completely expected.


     


    Yep.  The judgement amount will be further reduced in the court of appeal, to less than $100M and, who knows, maybe the appeal court judge will also uphold some of Samsung's patents infringement claim.

  • Reply 11 of 91
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,484member
    This judge is out of control. She is completely ignoring the jury's verdict and following her own agenda.
  • Reply 12 of 91
    libertyforalllibertyforall Posts: 1,289member
    The government just wants to make money for the legal system, and they know Apple has the money to blow. Typical.
  • Reply 13 of 91
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post


     


    Yep.  The judgement amount will be further reduced in the court of appeal, to less than $100M and, who knows, maybe the appeal court judge will also uphold some of Samsung's patents infringement claim.



     


    Or the new trial could result in a $2B judgement in Apple's favor.  It's a very expensive, long, drawn out game of legal roulette (apparently),

  • Reply 14 of 91
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,012member


    Next... Samsung will be awarded all of Apple's infringing patents. At least, that's what Samsung's lawyers want.

  • Reply 15 of 91
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,788member
    Apple doesn't need the money. A few hundred million here, a billion there? Meh. It's all about legal precedent. Apple won. They'll also win against potential future copiers (including Samsung.)

    As for Samsung, it's all just a cost of doing business. And what a dirty business it is. Their total corporate marketing budget was $12 billion last year. Losing hundreds of millions (or maybe billions, depending on the "new trial") is worth it for them. Because they've killed off all other Android handset makers.

    They got sued in the process, but so what. LG: gone. HTC: gone. Huawei: no wei.
    All headed for the "other" slice of the smartphone market share pie chart if not already there.

    Oh, the irony. Samsung has destroyed all other Android handset makers, and they paid Apple for the privilege.
  • Reply 16 of 91
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Ub52209 View Post


    Deceiving headline. Should read "Judge orders retrial of $440 million of $1.05 B verdict" The way its written sounds like Apple had its judgment award reduced unconditionally.



     I agree with your completely, but check out these headlines from a financial site:


     


    03:43 Judge cuts Apple award nearly in half MarketWatch


    03:43 Apple loses bid for more damages from Samsung MarketWatch

  • Reply 17 of 91
    adrayvenadrayven Posts: 460member
    It's not the verdict that is in question, it's a damages trial. Basically, she's saying the old jury didn't calculate the damages correctly for the products/patents in question and she's asking for a new jury to review the damages and submit their findings.
  • Reply 18 of 91
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    "It is not the proper role of the court to second-guess the jury's factual determination as to the proper amount of compensation,.." Koh said, commenting on the ruling.

     


     


    "...but I'm going to do it anyway by cutting it by 40%".

  • Reply 19 of 91
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,012member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by malax View Post


     I agree with your completely, but check out these headlines from a financial site:


     


    03:43 Judge cuts Apple award nearly in half MarketWatch


    03:43 Apple loses bid for more damages from Samsung MarketWatch



     


    The negative press is great click-bait... Just ask AppleInsider!

  • Reply 20 of 91

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post



    Apple doesn't need the money. A few hundred million here, a billion there? Meh. It's all about legal precedent. Apple won. They'll also win against potential future copiers (including Samsung.)



    As for Samsung, it's all just a cost of doing business. And what a dirty business it is. Their total corporate marketing budget was $12 billion last year. Losing hundreds of millions (or maybe billions, depending on the "new trial") is worth it for them. Because they've killed off all other Android handset makers.



    They got sued in the process, but so what. LG: gone. HTC: gone. Huawei: no wei.

    All headed for the "other" slice of the smartphone market share pie chart if not already there.



    Oh, the irony. Samsung has destroyed all other Android handset makers, and they paid Apple for the privilege.


    Sure seems to be how things are playing out. And Google is funding their OS development (until Samsung forks it or use their own OS and take all the advertising money with them).

Sign In or Register to comment.