Samsung seeks rehearing of appeal over $400M patent infringement ruling

Posted:
in General Discussion edited June 2015
Writing the next chapter of an ongoing feud with Apple, Samsung on Wednesday petitioned for a rehearing of a recent U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that upheld nearly $400 million in damages for infringing Apple design patents.




In a court document filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Samsung requested an en banc review of an earlier ruling from the same court that left the company saddled with $399 million in damages.

The case originates from a watershed 2012 California jury trial in which Apple was initially awarded $1.05 billion. Damages were later reduced after a partial retrial and currently stands at $548 million, though numerous appeals have been lodged by both parties.

As part of the appeals process, a three-member CAFC panel found in May that the Apple v. Samsung jury correctly awarded damages against infringing Samsung smartphones and tablet designs. Samsung is now seeking the full 12-judge panel review a key decision involving $399 million of calculated gains brought in by infringing Samsung products.

The San Jose Mercury News reported on the document earlier today.

Samsung reasserts a previously successful argument that a device as complex as a smartphone incorporates "hundreds or thousands of different patented technologies," and Apple's IP addresses only minor features. Additionally, some patents cover functional attributes not eligible for damages, a detail allegedly not properly considered by the original Apple v. Samsung trial jury.

Samsung's petition is related to the first Apple v. Samsung California court case. A second district court action in the same state covering newer devices resulted in damages equating to $120 million for Apple and $158,000 for Samsung. That case is also being appealed.

«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,976member
    Pressing their luck Samsung is.
  • Reply 2 of 29
    red oakred oak Posts: 640member
    F U Samesung. If you think things are tough now, wait until the new iPhone launches in 90 days
  • Reply 3 of 29
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,040member
    Good. By prolonging this in this fashion, they're just buying more adverse publicity for themselves as shameless charlatans.

    At this point, I believe most people accept the fact that they stole from Apple.
  • Reply 4 of 29
    I think it was their plan all along. File an appeal, file another appeal, file some motions, request a review, request a retrial, move to dismiss, move to vacate, stall, hem and haw (all while billing their client, Samsung, hourly), hoping Apple will give up trying to collect.
  • Reply 5 of 29
    bdkennedy1bdkennedy1 Posts: 1,459member

    Denied.

  • Reply 6 of 29
    ecatsecats Posts: 272member
    This is Samsung's M-O, they do this exact same thing with everyone else they've copied.

    Simply put it's easier to copy and drag on a long court case than it is to actually make a product - if anything it's a business model that exploits the arduous legal process for innovators / rewards infringement.
  • Reply 7 of 29
    rfrmacrfrmac Posts: 87member

    Judging from what has happened so far, I don't expect Apple to get a fair shake here either.  They are now the big kid on the block and that seems to have made a difference.  If this were not the case, this would have been settled a long time ago.  All you have to do is look at the pictures but this judge and jury didn't seem to get it. One of the comments above brought out the point that everyone knows they stole a good deal but that doesn't seem to make any difference.  Look what has happened to the award.  I just haven't understood this whole case.

  • Reply 8 of 29
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,657member
    Suck it up, Sammy. You're a f'n scummy company.
  • Reply 9 of 29
    egrassegrass Posts: 7member
    En banc rehearings are almost never granted. Period. To have any hope there would have to be a clear violation of binding prior precedent raised to but not already addressed by the 3 judge panel. (Sometimes en banc is taken in highly contentious political cases but this ain't one). Not. Gonna. Happen. Better chance of Supreme Court review after rejection of en banc consideration but that is only slightly less unlikely.
  • Reply 10 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Red Oak View Post



    F U Samesung. If you think things are tough now, wait until the new iPhone launches in 90 days

     

    This.

     

    The court cases and damages are all moot anyway. Everyone knows Samsung copied and other companies are careful what they "borrow" from Apple. They made their point and it's time to move on.

     

    You're right about the 90 days from now bit. With so many people still not upgrading to the iPhone 6/6P, the next iPhone is primed to break all records once again for sales. Only ones happy at Samsung will be Samsung Semi if they get to supply processors for phones that will sell a couple hundred million.

  • Reply 11 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post



    Good. By prolonging this in this fashion, they're just buying more adverse publicity for themselves as shameless charlatans.

    Not really. At this point most don't care one way or another what happens in the case.

  • Reply 12 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rfrmac View Post

     

    Judging from what has happened so far, I don't expect Apple to get a fair shake here either.  They are now the big kid on the block and that seems to have made a difference.  If this were not the case, this would have been settled a long time ago.  All you have to do is look at the pictures but this judge and jury didn't seem to get it. One of the comments above brought out the point that everyone knows they stole a good deal but that doesn't seem to make any difference.  Look what has happened to the award.  I just haven't understood this whole case.




    If Apple were smaller, it would have lost and would be appealing. Remember Microsoft slavishly copied the Mac and the US court system allowed it AND made a ruling that would have enabled any company to blatantly copy Apple's work without repercussions. Only after appealing the verdict did become victorious against Microsoft. The US court system has been extraordinarily antagonistic towards Apple protecting its patents from companies like Samsung and Google and Microsoft (in the past). I hope Apple keeps on fighting this case no matter what the US court system ultimately decides because not fighting would mean open season on everything Apple does. Another thing, as much as I have backed the Obama administration, I am hoping the next administration actually has the desire to protect companies that spend billions of US dollars and years of R&D coming up with products that delight people around the world instead of allowing theft to drag on for so many years without a final resolution.

  • Reply 13 of 29
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member

    Yeah, they should.

    With the way the court system works, they have a good chance.

    This is how history gets rewritten.

  • Reply 14 of 29
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    I think it was their plan all along. File an appeal, file another appeal, file some motions, request a review, request a retrial, move to dismiss, move to vacate, stall, hem and haw (all while billing their client, Samsung, hourly), hoping Apple will give up trying to collect.

    They are just following the game plan set out by SCO (remember them) in their case against IBM.

    That is still alive btw. They (or some legal shyster representing the dregs of the one fine company) keep coming back to court. So the saga goes on.

    I predict that by the time Samsung pays up, that $400M will be worth about $0.25. The lawyers will keep getting paid though.

  • Reply 15 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



    I think it was their plan all along. File an appeal, file another appeal, file some motions, request a review, request a retrial, move to dismiss, move to vacate, stall, hem and haw (all while billing their client, Samsung, hourly), hoping Apple will give up trying to collect.

    Samsung doesn't get it. This is not Korea where they can delay justice while they shop for a crooked judge...

     

    Another point: Samsung's got their fine down to less then 40% of the original amount... and they aren't even happy with that.

  • Reply 16 of 29
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Reply 17 of 29
    monstrositymonstrosity Posts: 2,199member

    Apple should just spend their billions on an iNuke and drop it on Samsung HQ.

    As a shareholder I'd say that's money well spent.

  • Reply 18 of 29
    formosaformosa Posts: 261member

    Unfortunately, from a market perspective, Samsung have won (with help from Android). They've successfully gotten away with this copying (only paying lawyers' fees and no fines while just counter-suing, appealing, delaying...) while becoming the number 1 phone manufacturer. It worked in their favor in the marketplace.

     

    Apple's main response (in the market) is to out-innovate Samsung with the iOS ecosystem, unique hardware and design and manufacturing techniques, which they are doing with the iPhone 6/6+. The courts are certainly not helping.

     

    On cue, Samsung followed up with the 6S S6 using metal/glass/non-removable battery. The cycle repeats, but this competition keeps Apple ahead, so Samsung are always following (no one has a viable equivalent to iOS+A-series processors for efficiency).

     

    Edit: S6, not 6S (even the phone name is a near-copy)

  • Reply 19 of 29
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,780member

    This has become all about saving face.

  • Reply 20 of 29
    tooltalktooltalk Posts: 766member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post



    Pressing their luck Samsung is.

     

    @dasanman69 :  Well, it's either this or SCOTUS.  Samsung does have a fairly good case here and, if Samsung prevails, it's also likely to defend and benefit Apple in the long run (ie, $400M win from Samsung is nothing compared to what Apple might to have pay Ericsson if upheld).  CAFC has ruled in favor of some appropriate apportionment in previous cases, but, in the last Samsung appeal, they somehow decided not to deal with the design disgorgement (without any apportionment), explaining that it's a legislative matter.   CAFC judges aren't biased like Apple's hometown jury or district court judges -- one of the three CFAC panel, Kim Moore, is the author of "Xenophobia in American Courts" -- but they are still under pressure from Apple supporters/influence in the US congress, so we will see. 

Sign In or Register to comment.