Apple and Motorola both appeal dismissal ruling from Judge Posner
176, 526, 556, 671, 691, 706, 724, 751, 767, 826 and 1005); portions of the court's evidentiary orders (including without limitation Dkt. Nos. 960 and 980) that were adverse to Apple in excluding certain evidence Apple intended to offer; those portions of the Court's May 22, 2012 Opinion and Order adverse to Apple in which the Court struck Apple's damages expert and underlying damages theories (Dkt. No. 956); and those portions of the Court's June 22, 2012 Opinion and Order adverse to Apple granting summary judgment against Apple as it relates to (1) Apple’s damages theories and (2) Apple’s entitlement to an injunction with respect to the Apple patents (Dkt. No. 1038).
Motorola Mobility is seeking reversal of those portions of the Court's summary judgment and claim construction orders that were adverse to Motorola (including without limitation Order of May 20, 2012 not appearing on the docket and Dkt. Nos. 176, 526, 556, 671, 691, 751, 747, 767, 826, 1005, 1038);
those portions of the Court's evidentiary orders (including without limitation Dkt. Nos. 771, 747, 803, 830, 900, 958, 956, 980) that were adverse to Motorola in excluding certain evidence Motorola intended to offer or in precluding Motorola from supplementing its expert reports or record evidence the Court's order denying Motorola's motion to dismiss or transfer this case (including without limitation Dkt. Nos. 66); those portions of the Court's May 22, 2012 Opinion and Order adverse to Motorola in which the Court struck Motorola's damages expert and underlying damages theories (Dkt. No. 956); and those portions of the Court's June 22, 2012 Opinion and Order adverse to Motorola granting summary judgment against Motorola as it relates to (1) Motorola's damages theories and (2) Motorola's entitlement to an injunction with respect to the Motorola patents (Dkt. No. 1038).
FOSS Patent, Judge Posner did not give Motorola Mobility or Apple guidance that other Judges have provided. Judge Alsup gave Oracle two do-overs of its damage claim against Google while Judge Sabraw in the Southern District of California told Apple how to fix its filing against Motorola in trhe Qualcomm-related patent exhaustion claim. The Court can help a plaintiff state its case unless it can be shown that there is no merit to the suit. That wasn't the case with Apple as Judge Posner had dismissed its claims for lack of proof, not for the absence of merit.
Judge Posner has made it tough for Apple to get an injunction, which is what the Cupertino based firm is shooting for. Remember, to get an injunction, it must be shown that monetary compensation is not enough to make the damaged party whole. To do that Apple has to balance on a high-wire. If Apple makes the damages conservative, it lessens the chance of the case being tossed out, but it also increases the chance that Apple could be satisfied by a monetary award reducing the chance of an injunction. On the other hand, if Apple says its damages are too high, it raises the chance if the Judge tossing the whole thing out. It's all a huge chess game and no matter where your allegiance lies, it should be interesting to see what happens.
1. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5289; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
This is going to turn into such a clusterf*ck of a mess. Truly, the only ones who will win will be the attorneys.
10. sprockkets (Posts: 946; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
What is dumb IIRC Posner is going to be the one doing the appeal.
Good luck with that one!
15. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5289; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Posner won't be hear the appeal, but once the appeal is decided (by the Court of Appeal), Posner will be ruling based on the decision that is handed down from the appeal. Posner can be expected to follow the letter of the appeal decision, so Apple should be careful what they ask for.
2. parkwaydr (Posts: 572; Member since: 07 Sep 2011)
Can't they just gtf over it? I mean are these companies ran by children? All they are gonna do is make posner even more upset and annoyed.
3. Hammerfest (Posts: 348; Member since: 12 May 2012)
This is a damned if you do and damned if you dont situation...
Goes back to court, Apple loses big time, Im happy for 2 reasons, one Apple lost again, and two... well ok just one :P
BUT if it goes back to court, and Motorola loses, then I will be a "mixed" bag of happy, because Motorola needs to learn to stop while they are ahead... and jumping back in and possibly getting crushed will be "just deserts" I really dont want to see happen...
14. jroc74 (Posts: 4030; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I agree 1000% with this.
I am a big Motorola fan.....but they shoulda just stopped while they were ahead. In the other hand....Apple losing may make them calm down with all the lawsuits.
4. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
It's all about business. You go to court to protect your property and assets. Can't have other companies infringing on patents or copying ideas.
5. wassup (Posts: 565; Member since: 23 Jun 2011)
the UK doesn't think anyone copied apple because apple also copied from previous tablets as well.
8. serious9010 (Posts: 254; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)
@wassup. Do not register on such a site if you're 12.
16. plgladio (Posts: 311; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)
Exactly, when a person steals from your house and says that it was his own, what will you do?
17. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
12 people need to go back to economics 101.
6. FrostyDanny (Posts: 90; Member since: 15 Jul 2012)
Why doesnt apple focus on their OWN products instead of trying to destroy the competition they are only hurting themselves and the consumers that buy their product!
9. roscuthiii (Posts: 1720; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Motorola should just sue for the FRAND capped $6.5M in damages (if I'm remembering the number there right), plus all legal fees for even having to appear in court due to Apple's frivolous patent litigation. Take those winnings and throw one kick-ass victory party.
The PR alone would probably make it worthwhile. Apple makes good products, but do they make the best? That's arguable. What nets them their profits then? Public perception. Never underestimate the power of good marketing.
11. TMach (Posts: 331; Member since: 29 Dec 2011)
I wish American judges would adopt the common sense approach of their British counterparts! Most of Apple's cases have been thrown out of British courts. Apple and all these companies, in view of such an approach, may re-appraise ther desire to rush to the law courts!
12. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
I would rather see judges continually just throw these cases out then have lopsided judges like Koh who is so blatantly siding with apple on every decision its not funny. Winning here and there is one thing... having one judge so firmly in your pocket that no matter what you throw at the court, she sides with it is another.
13. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5289; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Koh is the reason the Court of Appeal exists. Such a blatant example of judicial error hasn't been displayed in quite a while. Unfortunately, in Posner's ircumstance, there is a litigant (Apple) who won't take no for an answer. Moto has no choice but to pursue an appeal if Apple insists on continuing this train wreck. Meanwhile, the attorneys are billing at $750/hr.
18. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 5652; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)
I wish Ponser would DISMISS APPLE VS SAMSUNG case