Lawyers in Apple-Samsung patent dispute deliver closing arguments
Lawyers in the patent dispute betwen Apple and Samsung have delivered their closing arguments in the high-profile trial, with Apple pursuing $2.75bn (£1.7bn) in damages, reports The Recorder. The dispute centres around the claim that Samsung ripped off the unique design features of Apple's iPad and iPhone.
August 22, 2012 at 12:07 PM
2 minute read
Lawyers in the patent dispute betwen Apple and Samsung have delivered their closing arguments in the high-profile trial, with Apple pursuing $2.75bn (£1.7bn) in damages, reports The Recorder.
The dispute centres around the claim that Samsung ripped off the unique design features of Apple's iPad and iPhone.
Samsung's lawyer, Charles Verhoeven of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, told the nine-member jury that Apple is threatening to ruin the culture of Silicon Valley.
"Think about Silicon Valley back in the day," Verhoeven said, describing what he called the Valley's culture of free enterprise. "Your decision could change all that.
"Rather than compete in the marketplace, Apple is seeking a competitive edge in the courtroom" with heavyhanded patent litigation, he contended.
Apple's lawyer, Morrison & Foerster partner Harold McElhinny, had a more natural story to tell as the tech giants wrapped up their four-week trial over tablet and smartphone design and functionality.
"Steve Jobs started the iPhone development project in 2003," McElhinny told the jury. By 2007 the company was selling a smartphone that Time magazine hailed on its cover as the invention of the year. Before long, Samsung was ripping off Apple's four-years of 'hard work and ingenuity' by "copying the world's most successful product."
Disputing Samsung's claim that the iPhone design was obvious, McElhinny said "everyone, even Samsung, thought that the iPhone changed the world".
"Samsung was the iPhone's biggest fan," he said. "When they couldn't compete with it, they copied it."
Verhoeven described Apple's request for $2.75bn in damages as "a ridiculous number," that does not reflect anything close to lost profits.
"They know, like you know and I know," Verhoeven told the jury, "that no-one is ever going to be confused when they buy a very expensive phone with a multi-year contract."
Jurors are expected to begin their deliberations today (22 August).
The Recorder is a US affiliate title of Legal Week.
This content has been archived.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 AllSlaughter and May Leads As Government Buys Back £6 Billion of Military Homes
2 minute readLatAm Moves: DLA Piper Chile, Brazil’s Demarest Build Out Disputes Muscle
Kingsley Napley and Lord Pannick Spearhead Private Schools' Challenge to Government VAT Policy
Spain Loses Appeal as London Court Rejects Claim of Immunity in €101 Million Arbitral Award Enforcement
Trending Stories
- 1The Fearless Forecaster’s Employment Law Predictions for 2025
- 2Judicial Conference Declines Democratic Request to Refer Justice Thomas to DOJ
- 3People in the News—Jan. 2, 2025—Eastburn and Gray, Klehr Harrison
- 4Deal Watch: Latham, Paul Weiss, Debevoise Land on Year-End Big Deals. Plus, Mixed Messages for 2025 M&A
- 5Bathroom Recording Leads to Lawyer's Disbarment: Disciplinary Roundup
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