Apple seeks Samsung product ban, retrial in second California lawsuit
In two separate court filings on Friday, Apple lodged a motion for a permanent U.S. injunction on Samsung products found in infringement of certain utility patents by a jury earlier in May, while requesting a retrial of the same case.
As it did in its first California action against Samsung in 2012, Apple is looking to leverage a jury's recent decision to net a permanent injunction of Samsung devices found in infringement of three patents. The company is also requesting a complete retrial of the damages case that ended in a $119.6 million award, much less than the $2.2 billion Apple was seeking.
On the issue of a permanent injunction, Apple is asserting that the continued sales of Samsung's infringing products would cause the company irreparable harm that cannot be remedied with monetary damages.
As noted by FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, even if Apple wins an injunction, Samsung will likely be able to apply quick workarounds to skirt infringed patent claims.
Further, Apple v Samsung presiding Judge Lucy Koh already denied an injunction in the first California case, saying Apple's evidence did not sufficiently prove irreparable harm. Considering the current injunction is based on a similar piece of evidence, namely a conjoint consumer survey conducted by MIT professor John Hauser, the granting of an injunction from Koh would be surprising.
As for Apple's bid for a retrial, the company entered a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) seeking an order that additional Samsung products infringe certain patents, treble damages of the largest damages decision awarded by the jury or, in lieu of the previous, a complete retrial.
Described below in the 54-page filing, the request for a retrial applies to proposed motions for Samsung product injunctions and higher damages payouts relating to found infringed patents. These include the '647 data detectors, the '721 patent for "slide-to-unlock" functionality and the '172 patent for text prediction.
In addition, the filing states that "Samsung's improper and prejudicial statements to the jury warrant a new trial on infringement for the '414 and '959 patents (in the event that the Court does not grant JMOL of infringement), a new trial on willfulness for all patents other than the '721 patent (and also other than the '647 patent if the Court grants JMOL of willfulness for that patent), and a new trial on damages for all five of Apple's asserted patents."
While unlikely to be granted, Apple's last request seems to illustrate the company's displeasure of the jury's $119.6 million decision. The action contrasts a decidedly positive statement Apple issued after the verdict was handed down earlier this month.
Finally, Samsung also filed its own JMOL on Friday and, while the documents are sealed, Mueller believes the company is looking to reverse some or all of the jury's findings.
As it did in its first California action against Samsung in 2012, Apple is looking to leverage a jury's recent decision to net a permanent injunction of Samsung devices found in infringement of three patents. The company is also requesting a complete retrial of the damages case that ended in a $119.6 million award, much less than the $2.2 billion Apple was seeking.
On the issue of a permanent injunction, Apple is asserting that the continued sales of Samsung's infringing products would cause the company irreparable harm that cannot be remedied with monetary damages.
As noted by FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, even if Apple wins an injunction, Samsung will likely be able to apply quick workarounds to skirt infringed patent claims.
Further, Apple v Samsung presiding Judge Lucy Koh already denied an injunction in the first California case, saying Apple's evidence did not sufficiently prove irreparable harm. Considering the current injunction is based on a similar piece of evidence, namely a conjoint consumer survey conducted by MIT professor John Hauser, the granting of an injunction from Koh would be surprising.
As for Apple's bid for a retrial, the company entered a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) seeking an order that additional Samsung products infringe certain patents, treble damages of the largest damages decision awarded by the jury or, in lieu of the previous, a complete retrial.
Described below in the 54-page filing, the request for a retrial applies to proposed motions for Samsung product injunctions and higher damages payouts relating to found infringed patents. These include the '647 data detectors, the '721 patent for "slide-to-unlock" functionality and the '172 patent for text prediction.
In addition, the filing states that "Samsung's improper and prejudicial statements to the jury warrant a new trial on infringement for the '414 and '959 patents (in the event that the Court does not grant JMOL of infringement), a new trial on willfulness for all patents other than the '721 patent (and also other than the '647 patent if the Court grants JMOL of willfulness for that patent), and a new trial on damages for all five of Apple's asserted patents."
While unlikely to be granted, Apple's last request seems to illustrate the company's displeasure of the jury's $119.6 million decision. The action contrasts a decidedly positive statement Apple issued after the verdict was handed down earlier this month.
Finally, Samsung also filed its own JMOL on Friday and, while the documents are sealed, Mueller believes the company is looking to reverse some or all of the jury's findings.
Comments
The problem samsung's employees are lair about their stupid attitude with shitty galaxy smartphones. I don't trust bad samsung employees. So they should getting a pink slip for their job for stealing from apple and blackberry patents. The South Korea government are getting bust for stealing from America company by their shit samsung company
Funny isn't it. Living in Germany I don't trust american companies at all .. they are all a pack of lying spies.
So what I say you are busted with your shitty android phones. I don't trust your stupid mouth. I hate crappy android phones hardware. So **** you duke
Brainless texan shitheads are quite amusing. But you can't trust them .. just laugh at them and screw them where it hurts :-)
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarndyce_and_Jarndyce
Funny isn't it. Living in Germany I don't trust american companies at all .. they are all a pack of lying spies.
Other US and Germany companies are corrupted.. Apple isn't, what's your point?
Apple did not invent those great things..they're system did, inventors choose Apple over other companies because they trust them,
Not every American are the same just like not every German are Hitler.
I am agree about stupid mindless android fanboys on the appleinsider. So I am total piss off at google with crappy phone maker vendors.
Just STFU. You're just as annoying as the anti-Apple trolls that regularly come here. Do you think that because you bash Android and like Apple that we'll put up with you?
Amen. I think it's the grammar more that the thoughts that irritate me.