Judge denies Samsung a retrial over contentious Apple 'rubber-banding' patent
Judge Lucy Koh handed down a ruling on Thursday denying Samsung's motion to retry a high-profile patent case between the two rivals based on changes to the scope of Apple's so-called "rubber-banding" scrolling patent.
Apple scored another victory on Thursday in the legal wrangling surrounding its lawsuit against Samsung when Judge Lucy Koh denied Samsung's request for a retrial on the Korean company's infringement of Apple's rubber-banding patent, known colloquially as the '381 patent, according to FOSS Patents.
The patent, which covers the rebounding effect seen when a user scrolls to the end of a list on an Apple device, was a key piece of Apple's 2012 victory in the lawsuit. The United States Patent and Trademark office tentatively rejected all claims in the patent in April of this year, but was confirmed by the government agency in June.
In her ruling, Judge Koh also confirmed that a limited retrial to adjust the amount of damages awarded to Apple will proceed. Judge Koh has already cut the award, originally set by the jury at more than $1 billion, by more than 40 percent.
Apple scored another victory on Thursday in the legal wrangling surrounding its lawsuit against Samsung when Judge Lucy Koh denied Samsung's request for a retrial on the Korean company's infringement of Apple's rubber-banding patent, known colloquially as the '381 patent, according to FOSS Patents.
The patent, which covers the rebounding effect seen when a user scrolls to the end of a list on an Apple device, was a key piece of Apple's 2012 victory in the lawsuit. The United States Patent and Trademark office tentatively rejected all claims in the patent in April of this year, but was confirmed by the government agency in June.
In her ruling, Judge Koh also confirmed that a limited retrial to adjust the amount of damages awarded to Apple will proceed. Judge Koh has already cut the award, originally set by the jury at more than $1 billion, by more than 40 percent.
Comments
Tap to document-zoom and the bounce-back patents are quite frankly brilliant (I'm referring to the features, not the patents in and of themselves).
$20 billion ….
Wouldn't that be nice?
Bribing people can start to get very expensive over time..
They should be forced to pay a fine for demanding an illegal retrial.
No worries, Sammy! Lucy probably is going for another cut and Apple will end up getting a buck for all their troubles helping Google and Samsung to get where they are today.
But let me share something here. I stopped using / buying any product with Samsung name on it. Forever!
And stop stealing.
And be glad that the Korean judged helped them out by diminishing the amount of money they have to pay Apple for stealing.
Then they have the nerve to demand a retrial?
here is an idea Samsung... STOP stealing from Apple.
And then stop wasting taxpayer dollars and precious court time with your frivolous lawsuits.
I'm just waiting for Toyota / Lexus to start on Kia ….
Guess that means a lot of items, incl. Apple products, or are you just talking about the face plate instead of the guts?
Silicon, Silicone rubber? Rubber rubber, rubber?
This fight has been ... over-stretched.