USPTO rejects claims of Apple patent asserted against Samsung in California trial

Posted:
in General Discussion edited August 2014
The USPTO on Tuesday rejected multiple claims of Apple's '172 patent for autocompletion of text input, which the company successfully asserted in its second California court action against Samsung.


Source: USPTO


In a court filing on Thursday, Samsung informed District Court Judge Lucy Koh of the recent U.S. Patent and Trademark Office decision to reject claims of Apple's U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172 for predictive text input, which was asserted against the Korean tech giant in the two companies' most recent California dispute.

Specifically, the USPTO Office Action, brought about by an ex parte reexamination request, concluded that two patents anticipated Claim 18 of Apple's '172 property, prompting the body to reject it citing prior art. The decision could deal a blow to Apple's $119.6 million win as Judge Koh found Samsung to have infringed on the autocomplete patent in a summary judgment handed down before the trial began.

As noted by FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, who spotted Samsung's filing earlier today, noted an infringement ruling on an invalid patent is meaningless and could decrease damages owed to Apple. In addition, Judge Koh may agree with an outstanding post-trial motion from Samsung that seeks to hold Claim 18 invalid.

The Office Action is not final and Apple still has a number of appeal routes to explore before the patent is officially deemed invalid. The USPTO previously invalidated Apple patents for iOS "pinch-to-zoom" and "rubber-banding" assets.

While Apple and Samsung continue to wage patent war in the U.S., both companies recently agreed to settle all international litigation.

«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 53
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    So... successfully asserted already. Meaning they’re valid.

  • Reply 2 of 53
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    So... successfully asserted already. Meaning they’re valid.
    Still doesn't look good that these patents are being invalidated by the patent office.
  • Reply 3 of 53
    magman1979magman1979 Posts: 1,209member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Still doesn't look good that these patents are being invalidated by the patent office.
    They likely got invalidated due to an "anonymous" claim being filed to have them thrown out. Wouldn't surprise me a single bit if the anonymous party was someone with ties to Scamsung.

    Apple will just appeal and have the decision reversed and the patent will stand, just watch.

    The USPTO usually attempts to dismiss patents as soon as an anonymous claim is filed, forcing the patent holder to begin, in some cases multiple, appeals.

    Just goes to show how broken the patent system is.
  • Reply 4 of 53
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    magman1979 wrote: »
    They likely got invalidated due to an "anonymous" claim being filed to have them thrown out. Wouldn't surprise me a single bit if the anonymous party was someone with ties to Scamsung.

    Apple will just appeal and have the decision reversed and the patent will stand, just watch.

    The USPTO usually attempts to dismiss patents as soon as an anonymous claim is filed, forcing the patent holder to begin, in some cases multiple, appeals.

    Just goes to show how broken the patent system is.

    Best thing would probably be to do away with software patents all together.
  • Reply 5 of 53
    So... successfully asserted already. Meaning they’re valid.
    Uhm no.
  • Reply 6 of 53
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,501member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Best thing would probably be to do away with software patents all together.

    Thanks for the pointless FOSS argument where corporations invest heavily and FOSS says, ``thanks for the freebies.''

    Innovation is both a physical and abstract reality.
  • Reply 7 of 53
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    Best thing would probably be to do away with software patents all together.

     

    No, that would not be the best thing.

  • Reply 8 of 53
    froodfrood Posts: 771member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    So... successfully asserted already. Meaning they’re valid.


     

    Apple successfully asserted that Samsung used predictive text.  

     

      If Apple held the patent on that, it would be worth money.  Since it was thought at the time they did, it was calculated into the $119mil amount.  Now that it turns out Apple doesn't hold a patent on that, the amount will be reduced.

     

    Until Apple appeals and owns predictive text patent again.

     

    Then they can go to court again to determine if the original amount was right.  Until it turns out they don't own the patent after all....

     

    Either way, it is asserted that Samsung used predictive text.

  • Reply 9 of 53
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,021member
    So judge Koh claims that Samsung's patent of pushing a tv signal over a phone wire for video conferencing in the mid 1900's against FaceTime is valid. Yet this modern technique in a modern device that is relevant today, somehow gets questioned and disqualified.
  • Reply 10 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    Still doesn't look good that these patents are being invalidated by the patent office.

     

    They're not invalidated. The patents were granted and remain valid until all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. This could take years. Apple will now make a submission to the USPTO which they will review and this can go back and forth several times.

  • Reply 11 of 53
    kennmsrkennmsr Posts: 97member
    As stated earlier either Samsung has instigated this reversal or maybe payed someone to cast doubt on the validity of Apple's application of this technology.
  • Reply 12 of 53
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Best thing would probably be to do away with software patents all together.

     

    I must say, Rogifan, it has been interesting over the past six or so months seeing your metamorphosis from Apple enthusiast to almost gloomy naysayer.

     

    I must say that I am most curious as to what is responsible for creating such a change.

  • Reply 13 of 53
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    gtr wrote: »
    I must say, Rogifan, it has been interesting over the past six or so months seeing your metamorphosis from Apple enthusiast to almost gloomy naysayer.

    I must say that I am most curious as to what is responsible for creating such a change.
    I've never been much of a supporter of these lawsuits. In fact one of the original iPhone UI designers (Bas Ording) left Apple in part, because he said too much of his time was being taken up by lawsuits.

    Not sure what Apple really won in the end. Sure we can say a jury charged Samsung with copying but so what? It wasn't about money. Google is as committed to Android as ever. And while Samsung might be struggling now it's not because of these lawsuits. So what was gained actually?
  • Reply 14 of 53
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    gtr wrote: »
    I must say, Rogifan, it has been interesting over the past six or so months seeing your metamorphosis from Apple enthusiast to almost gloomy naysayer.

    I must say that I am most curious as to what is responsible for creating such a change.
    Oh and one other thing I forgot to mention: all the stuff that leaked from the trials - from design prototypes, to emails about advertising and Steve's top 100 meeting...was it really worth it to have all that stuff leak? Especially for a company that prides itself on secrecy?
  • Reply 15 of 53
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    rogifan wrote: »
    I've never been much of a supporter of these lawsuits. In fact one of the original iPhone UI designers (Bas Ording) left Apple in part, because he said too much of his time was being taken up by lawsuits.

    Not sure what Apple really won in the end. Sure we can say a jury charged Samsung with copying but so what? It wasn't about money. Google is as committed to Android as ever. And while Samsung might be struggling now it's not because of these lawsuits. So what was gained actually?

    I can understand your lack of enthusiasm regarding any legal action that Apple has been forced to take.

    However, advocating that companies or individuals, that have invested considerable time, money, and resources into creating products, ignore when those products are 'slavishly' imitated is just not acceptable.
  • Reply 16 of 53
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Oh and one other thing I forgot to mention: all the stuff that leaked from the trials - from design prototypes, to emails about advertising and Steve's top 100 meeting...was it really worth it to have all that stuff leak? Especially for a company that prides itself on secrecy?

    I believe, in the long term, it has probably done very little damage.

    Time will tell.
  • Reply 17 of 53
    gerardgerard Posts: 68member
    Actually it may not have been successful at winning rewards. But it did force Samsung to depend on there own designs. They based there galaxy phone from a smooth stone; and it sank just as fast as one.
  • Reply 18 of 53
    yojimbo007yojimbo007 Posts: 1,130member
    Got to be proud of out legal system.. Arent u now ! .????

    Unreal...... System designed to work for lawyers by lawyers.. Nothing more !
  • Reply 19 of 53
    I might be half asleep here but a patent is a patent and they used Apple's patents.
  • Reply 20 of 53
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Best thing would probably be to do away with software patents all together.

    ARE YOU SERIOUS?

    you're sounding like a fandroid.

    oh yeah screw all software patents and watch scamsung introduce their new laptop with OS X Yosammity and iOS 8 for mobile devices.

    While I'll be off developing Angry Birds Disneyland.
Sign In or Register to comment.