Judge Koh Denies Apple Ban of Samsung but Also Denies Samsung's Request for New Trial

Discussion in 'Android News' started by dgstorm, Dec 18, 2012.

  1. dgstorm
    Offline

    dgstorm Editor in Chief Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Messages:
    7,615
    Likes Received:
    1,593
    Trophy Points:
    258
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,608
    [​IMG]

    Judge Lucy Koh made a ruling in regards to the Samsung vs. Apple patent wars appeals process. Both sides scored a victory and a loss in the round of events. First, Judge Koh denied Apple's request to ban Samsung products over the court victory. She ruled that Apple could not prove their sales were harmed enough to warrant a ban, and they also failed to prove that the features Samsung infringed upon were the reason anyone chose a Samsung phone over the iPhone. Here's a snipped from the Judge,

    That was a loss for Apple and a victory for Samsung; however, the reverse also happened. Judge Koh denied Samsung's request for a new trial. Samsung claimed that the jury was tainted by jury foreman Velvin Hogan, but Judge Koh ruled otherwise, and will not grant a new trial.

    There is one area of contention that has not been decided yet. Judge Koh has yet to rule on a modified damages award. Apple wants an additional $121 Million on top of the $1.05 Billion already awarded, but Samsung wants the damage reduced because they believe the Hogan-led jury made incorrect calculations. Of course, both sides will likely appeal these verdicts, and there is still the matter of the appeals that are already scheduled for 2014.

    Update: A separate report indicates the extra amount Apple is requesting in their bid to increase the damages is much higher than originally reported. Since we are not too sure which one is accurate, we thought it best to simply report the other info as well. Here's a quote with the details,



    It looks like the two gladiators will be trading blows for quite some time...

    Source: PhoneArena
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2012
  2. Jimbop
    Offline

    Jimbop Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Judge Koh seems to want to wash her hands of this case and move on. Yet she will find she has to revisit it anyways once some of these patents of Apple's get invalidated.
  3. WildcatRudy
    Offline

    WildcatRudy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Near the lake in SCS, MI
    Ratings:
    +3
    I am trying to figure out the advantage to Samsung demanding a new trial, vs. just going through the appeals process. A party can only appeal a decision if it is shown that there was a flaw in the legal proceedings (in this case, the alleged jury tainting). An appeal might, for all I know, be harder to make a case for...?

    At any rate, at least Koh made a somewhat better decision in not banning the products. I'm not a fan of Samsung's products all that much, but they in no way deserve the crap that apple flings their way.
  4. johnomaz
    Offline

    johnomaz Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,539
    Likes Received:
    304
    Trophy Points:
    148
    Location:
    Central Valley, California
    Ratings:
    +308
    The juror was a complete 'tard though that they are arguing about. He had specific guidelines to follow and ignored them. He redefined what patent infringement was and told the other jurors to follow him and they did. Sounds to me like Koh is a moron that doesn't want to do her job right.
  5. BlackMill
    Offline

    BlackMill Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +2
    Personally I think Judge Koh' and Velvin Hogans logic can be seen as pure
    View attachment 59292
  6. jseah
    Offline

    jseah Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    978
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +25
    Samsung just got more ammunition for appealing.

    Apple 'pinch-to-zoom' patent invalidated by USPTO

    The USPTO just invalidated Apple's pinch to zoom patent. This quote is from the article above:

    "The USPTO's decision cited multiple cases of prior art including two U.S. patents, one international property and two Japanese filings."

    With the rate at which the USPTO is invalidating Apple's patents, pretty soon there will be no more meat left to Apple's infringement lawsuit against Samsung.
Search tags for this page

genius