x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Apple-Samsung closing arguments are pushed back due to decision in Court of Appeals

Apple-Samsung closing arguments are pushed back due to decision in Court of Appeals

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags:

Apple-Samsung closing arguments are pushed back due to decision in Court of Appeals
Had everything gone as scheduled in the Apple-Samsung patent trial II, "the thriller with the manilla folders," both sides would have wrapped up their closing statements on Monday, and turned the case over to the jury for deliberations. But as it turns out, a ruling in another courtroom has implications for the Apple-Samsung trial, which forced Judge Lucy Koh to add extra hours of testimony before the jury gets the case.

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a 95 page ruling in a separate case between Apple and Motorola. The latter case does have implications  for the Apple-Samsung trial since it covers Apple's '647 patent covering "quick links" or "data detectors. That is one of five patents that Apple claims that Samsung infringed on. The Appeals Court reversed the original ruling and reinstated Motorola's claim, which was previously dismissed when Judge Richard Posner said that neither Apple nor Motorola could prove that they were damaged by the actions of the other company.

The issue with the '647 patent that will require the additional testimony, is the definition of what an analyzer server is. The patent revolves around "quick links," which requires the use of the analyzer server. The sitting jury in the current Apple-Samsung case has not been given a definition of what such a server is. Judge Posner had defined it as "a server routine separate from a client that receives data having structures from the client." Apple had originally disagreed with that definition, but the federal appeals court has now sided with the judge. Motorola and Apple are now free to sue each other again over this patent.

Each side on Monday, will call an expert witness to define what an analyzer server is. The two experts are Carnegie Mellon professor Todd Mowry and University of North Carolina professor Kevin Jeffay. This could push back closing arguments until Tuesday.

Apple is seeking more than $2 billion from Samsung for allegedly infringing on five patents. Samsung has filed a cross-claim, accusing Apple of infringing on a pair of Samsung patents, and is seeking approximately $6 million.

source: CAFC

19 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 27 Apr 2014, 02:57 6

1. JMartin22 (Posts: 1245; Member since: 30 Apr 2013)


This is likely an unwanted revelation for Apple. Now Samsung gets to make it's closing argument that builds upon their further narrative, that Apple's patents and their price tag is unwarranted and (now) seemingly less credible.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 14:57

17. Ashoaib (Posts: 2428; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)


I hope history will turn around

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 03:04 6

2. Sauce (unregistered)


Can this bologna just end already? This sh*t is ridiculous.

This is almost worse than that Trayvon Martin case.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 03:54 2

6. JMartin22 (Posts: 1245; Member since: 30 Apr 2013)


I agree with that sentiment on the TM case. It was hijacked by political race baiters and exploited for views and money.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 11:14 1

13. PBXtech (Posts: 983; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


Only thing this trial needs at this point is a dozen cop cars chasing a white bronco.

Flipping circus of the judicial system.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 03:34 8

3. mayur007 (Posts: 471; Member since: 10 Apr 2012)


i think apple has free time...

rather than innovating they chose this option ...;.

the que is why they innovate(they are not know for innovation)..

they will buy from another company n will say they innovated ..

they steal as well...

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 11:50 3

14. deewinc (Posts: 191; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)


Apple forks out $100M for engaging in anti-trust behaviour. They are the leading stealer of other company's bright mights too

http://blog.gsmarena.com/google-apple-tech-companies-make-324m-anti-trust-settlement/

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 14:24

16. mayur007 (Posts: 471; Member since: 10 Apr 2012)


true..

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 03:45 4

4. StraightEdgeNexus (Posts: 3617; Member since: 14 Feb 2014)


Those massive profits generated are all probably wasted on this lawsuit arguments.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 03:50 2

5. _Bone_ (Posts: 2140; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)


Google at work heh heh heh

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 04:42 1

7. techperson211 (Posts: 710; Member since: 27 Feb 2014)


Hopefully if Sammy won this case . Ifruit would call it a day. Or just file another patent B.S. case.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 05:31 1

8. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6736; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)


Next thing we know the jury/judge is on apples side

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 06:22 3

9. willard12 (Posts: 886; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)


Apple has so many law suits its cases are starting to run in to each other.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 07:05 1

10. AfterShock (Posts: 2966; Member since: 02 Nov 2012)


Let any fine, be paid in rolls of nickels.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 10:21

11. LikeMyself (Posts: 302; Member since: 23 Sep 2013)


Keep fighting! LG in my country is so underestimated that the retailers sell it almost with price mentioned in LG site. In contrast, an S5 or an iPhone cost $1050. A Galaxy Tab 3 10.1 costs $700!!!

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 11:00 1

12. express77 (unregistered)


Another crapsuit.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 11:51 4

15. deewinc (Posts: 191; Member since: 21 Feb 2013)


Very soon Apple is going to sue itself out of total confusion.

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 14:58 1

18. Ashoaib (Posts: 2428; Member since: 15 Nov 2013)


Lolz... that will be really nice

posted on 27 Apr 2014, 22:58 1

19. express77 (unregistered)


That's innovation.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories