Thursday, August 28, 2014
Search
  
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
 Judge Rejects Samsung's Demand For New Trial, Apple's Patent Award Demands
You are sending an email that contains the article
and a private message for your recipient(s).
Your Name:
Your e-mail: * Required!
Recipient (e-mail): *
Subject: *
Introductory Message:
HTML/Text
(Photo: Yes/No)
(At the moment, only Text is allowed...)
 
Message Text: A court in California on Tuesday denied Samsung a retrial in a patent infringement dispute with Apple, and also declined to raise the damages earlier awarded to Apple.

The court also granted judgment as matter of law that Samsung's patent infringement was not willful - a finding that could have formed the basis to triple the damages owed by Samsung.

Last August, a jury decided that that the Samsung must pay Apple US$1.05 billion for infringing design and utility patents in Samsung smartphones and tablets.

Samsung asked for a new trial of the case, alleging that the foreman of the jury was untruthful and biased.

On Tuesday, Judge Lucy H. Koh of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose division, said the jury "had ample opportunity to compensate Apple for Samsung's use of its product designs." The jury awarded $382 million in damages for six products found to have diluted Apple's trade dress patents, but Apple filed for an additional $400 million. "Apple had not clearly shown that it was not adequately compensated for the losses it suffered due to Samsung's dilution of its trade dress in its products," Judge Koh wrote.

The Judge also denied Samsung's motion for judgement that none of Samsung's accused phones infringed Apple's design patents, and also denied Samsung's motion in the for a new trial.

The court also ruled against Samsung's claim that some Apple patents in the suit were invalid for indefiniteness, while granting an Apple plea that claims of a Samsung patent were invalid.
 
Home | News | All News | Reviews | Articles | Guides | Download | Expert Area | Forum | Site Info
Site best viewed at 1024x768+ - CDRINFO.COM 1998-2014 - All rights reserved -
Privacy policy - Contact Us .