MoFo and WilmerHale secure $1bn win for Apple in Samsung patent dispute
Morrison & Foerster (MoFo) and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have helped Apple to a landmark $1bn (£634m) court victory in its high-profile patent dispute with Samsung, reports The Recorder. The jury in the case - which centred around the claim that Samsung ripped off the unique design features of Apple's iPad and iPhone - found that Samsung infringed most of the patents Apple sued over, and its trade dress on the iPhone and iPad, and did so willfully.
August 28, 2012 at 05:37 AM
2 minute read
Morrison & Foerster (MoFo) and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have helped Apple to a landmark $1bn (£634m) court victory in its high-profile patent dispute with Samsung, reports The Recorder.
The jury in the case – which centred around the claim that Samsung ripped off the unique design features of Apple's iPad and iPhone – found that Samsung infringed most of the patents Apple sued over, and its trade dress on the iPhone and iPad, and did so willfully.
Samsung's cross claims for infringement were completely rejected, with Apple awarded $1.05bn (£665m). If the verdict is not chopped down in post-trial motions or on appeal, it will stand as the largest patent verdict in history.
The nine-member jury sitting in San Jose rendered a verdict after just two-and-a-half days of deliberations. The four-week trial featured lawyers from MoFo and WilmerHale for Apple, and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan for Samsung.
A key issue which remains to be confirmed is whether Judge Lucy Koh will issue a permanent injunction against Samsung, and if so how severe it will be.
Patent experts see a permanent injunction as likely. "Keep in mind, a preliminary injunction is in place. It would be quite surprising if [Koh] didn't enter an injunction at all. The question is how broad an injunction," said Professor Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School.
Professor Brian Love of Santa Clara University School of Law said he would expect a permanent injunction and "probably more likely than not" an order by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit staying it pending an appeal.
"Given the willful infringement, it's more likely than not the damages award will increase, up to three times" the jury's award, Love said, noting that will be within Koh's discretion.
"It's not an across-the-board victory for Apple," Love said, "but it's very close."
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This content has been archived.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
© 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 AllLatAm 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
Jones Day Expands European Footprint with Global Disputes Partner in Madrid
Trending Stories
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