Apple beats Samsung in patent case
Just as the workweek came to a close on Friday, a jury delivered the much-anticipated verdict in the historic patent case between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co.
August 27, 2012 at 06:51 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Just as the workweek came to a close on Friday, a jury delivered the much-anticipated verdict in the historic patent case between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co.
After less than three days of deliberations, the jury found that Samsung had infringed six of Apple's patents by copying features of the company's iPhone and iPad. The jury ordered the Korean company to pay California-based Apple $1.05 billion in damages, which is less than half of the $2.5 billion Apple was seeking but is still one of the largest intellectual property awards in history. What's more, the jury found that Samsung willfully infringed five of Apple's patents, which means Judge Lucy Koh, who oversaw the case, could triple Apple's damages award.
Apple also requested injunctions against the sale of Samsung's infringing products on Friday. A hearing regarding the injunctions will take place Sept. 20.
Not only does the verdict solidify Apple's dominance in the smartphone and tablet market, but it also is a huge setback for Google Inc., whose Android software powers Samsung's infringing products. The verdict also could help Apple pursue litigation against other companies that sell Android-based items, including Amazon Inc., HTC Corp. and Motorola.
According to Thomson Reuters, Apple shares climbed almost 2 percent on Friday to a record high of $675. The company also became the biggest company by market value in history last week.
Some experts note that the verdict will force Apple's competitors to create more innovative, original products. Meanwhile, Samsung, not surprisingly, is deeply disappointed by its loss. “Today's verdict should not be viewed as a win for Apple, but as a loss for the American consumer,” Samsung said in a statement. “It will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices. It is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies.”
Read the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post for more analysis on the trial and verdict.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the Apple-Samsung patent dispute, read:
Just as the workweek came to a close on Friday, a jury delivered the much-anticipated verdict in the historic patent case between
After less than three days of deliberations, the jury found that Samsung had infringed six of
Not only does the verdict solidify
According to Thomson Reuters,
Some experts note that the verdict will force
Read the Wall Street Journal and
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the Apple-Samsung patent dispute, read:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250