Apple wins UK essential patent claim against Samsung
Apple Inc. has won the latest installment in its epic patent war against Samsung Electronics Co., after a U.K. judge ruled on Thursday that the California-based company did not infringe three Samsung patents on mobile technology.
March 07, 2013 at 06:58 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Apple Inc. has won the latest installment in its epic patent war against Samsung Electronics Co., after a U.K. judge ruled on Thursday that the California-based company did not infringe three Samsung patents on mobile technology.
At trial last year, Samsung contended that Apple had infringed three of its patents involving the transmission of data over third-generation mobile networks. London-based Judge Christopher Floyd, however, found that Samsung should never have been granted the patents in the first place, since their use existed in prior art.
A Samsung spokesperson told Bloomberg that the company will review Floyd's ruling before deciding whether to appeal. “For decades, we have heavily invested in pioneering the development of technological innovations in the mobile industry,” Samsung said in a separate statement. “We will continue to take the measures necessary to protect our intellectual property rights.”
Last October, a U.K. judge granted Samsung a somewhat Pyrrhic victory when he ruled that the Korean company's Galaxy tablets did not infringe the iPad because they weren't “cool” enough to be confused with Apple's product.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the Apple/Samsung patent war, see:
Apple drops patent claims against Samsung smartphone only sold in Europe
No injunctions against Apple, Samsung products in the U.S. and Europe
Apple must rewrite “apology ads” following reprimand from UK court
Apple, Samsung narrowly escape adverse inference instruction
Technology: Are you an Apple or a Samsung fan?
Apple beats Samsung in patent case
At trial last year, Samsung contended that
A Samsung spokesperson told Bloomberg that the company will review Floyd's ruling before deciding whether to appeal. “For decades, we have heavily invested in pioneering the development of technological innovations in the mobile industry,” Samsung said in a separate statement. “We will continue to take the measures necessary to protect our intellectual property rights.”
Last October, a U.K. judge granted Samsung a somewhat Pyrrhic victory when he ruled that the Korean company's Galaxy tablets did not infringe the iPad because they weren't “cool” enough to be confused with
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the
No injunctions against
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
© 2025 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 All
‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
5 minute read
In-House Lawyers Are Focused on Employment and Cybersecurity Disputes, But Looking Out for Conflict Over AI
Trending Stories
- 1New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 2No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 3Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 4Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 5Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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
