Judge Koh shoots down Apple's request for a ban and Samsung's motion for a new trial

Judge Koh shoots down Apple's request for a ban and Samsung's motion for a new trial
Judge Lucy Koh has started to release her rulings based on the post-trial hearing between Samsung and Apple that she presided over on December 6th. On Monday, the judge ruled against Apple's motion to have some 26 Samsung devices banned. The judge said that Apple could not prove that Apple iPhone sales were harmed enough to warrant a ban. She also said that Apple failed to prove that the features the jury said Samsung infringed on, were the reasons why people chose an iPhone over a Samsung device.

Judge Koh also denied Samsung's motion seeking a new trial. The decision vindicates jury foreman Velvin Hogan whom Samsung alleged was biased against the Korean manufacturer because of a legal issue Hogan had with Samsung partner Seagate Technology. There was alsao some question about Hogan's legal knowledge as he took over the jury during deliberations.

Meanwhile, the judge still needs to rule on the damages awarded. Since Samsung was found by the jury to willfully infringe on some Apple patents, Apple has the right to ask the judge to triple the damages on some parts of the $1.05 billion award. It is seeking an additional $121 million from its rival. Samsung has asked the judge to cut the damage amount based on what it sees as incorrect calculations by the Hogan-led jury.

Samsung still intends to appeal the decision, as is its right. Both tech giants will face each other in another trial at the same courthouse sometime in 2014.

source: WSJ



1. Nathan_ingx

Posts: 4769; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

"Samsung may have cut into Apple's customer base somewhat..." So what?? it's not Samsung that did it...it is the customers' choice!!

8. p0rkguy

Posts: 685; Member since: Nov 23, 2010

Her entire quote is just competitive business. If that's the case, Microsoft should sue Apple for OSX.

18. garz_pa

Posts: 154; Member since: Nov 03, 2011

Actually, Microsoft got that whole graphical user interface thing from Apple.


Posts: 63; Member since: Jul 20, 2012

and i wonder where apple got gui from ehhh?

29. JC557

Posts: 1919; Member since: Dec 07, 2011

GUI is not Apple you f**king moron.

34. true1984

Posts: 869; Member since: May 23, 2012

wrong, apple and microsoft got it from xerox

10. MeoCao unregistered

The fun part is how much SS has to pay now. I think the calculations that the jury made was a total mess. And Apple garbage Steve Jobs patent will be invalidated too. After all this there is still Court of Appeals and it will be a hollow victory at best for Apple

33. TheMan

Posts: 494; Member since: Sep 21, 2012

Personally, I was surprised that SS went with the "foreman's biased" as its lead argument. I thought the issue was that the jury didn't follow the instruction given it -- more through incompetence as opposed to a vendetta -- resulting in a mistrial. But, then, I'm not an attorney; I play one online.

16. Ohrules

Posts: 327; Member since: Jun 11, 2012

this may be beside the point, but in the featured stories, it says: "Jidge Koh says no"

25. sithvenger

Posts: 371; Member since: Aug 25, 2012

So y don't u day that when customers choose apple. Instead u go into a tirade.

28. JC557

Posts: 1919; Member since: Dec 07, 2011

I didn't know we, the customers, have to buy stuff from Apple.

2. anywherehome

Posts: 971; Member since: Dec 13, 2011

It was clear iKoh would deny.......like completely unfair court battle not allowing showing facts against rotten and lying Apple....hope Apple+Microsfot=pure Evil will pay 3 % to Motorola!

17. Mxyzptlk unregistered

You can't pay for fair use.

20. Nathan_ingx

Posts: 4769; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

And it's not fair to sue each and every time similarities exists.

24. jacko1977

Posts: 428; Member since: Feb 11, 2012

why when apple is bad in the spotlight your nowhere to be seen ?

39. dmckay12

Posts: 243; Member since: Feb 25, 2012

Please cite the precedent for that. Specifically the non-existant precedent that allows a company to knowingly violate patents in the making of a product and profit off of it without paying for it. Apple knew that the patents existed and refused to pay for them. Fair use=/=free.

45. rusticguy

Posts: 2828; Member since: Aug 11, 2012

You mean stealing forcefully and then when gettin g caught calling it Fair use right?

46. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

For the umpteenth time...the F in FRAND ...does....not......stand....for.....Free.....

3. quakan

Posts: 1418; Member since: Mar 02, 2011

As if a $1.05 billion isn't enough. If had even a fraction of that......sigh.

4. bvalde09

Posts: 191; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Are we serious? Apple is seeking more money, so 1 Billion isnt enough? Apple vs Samsung We all heard about this and we are f......ng tired of the same sh.t. Why dont you guys give a new face to your IOS? Give a new face to the Iphone instead of making money on court?

11. anywherehome

Posts: 971; Member since: Dec 13, 2011

and the fact is to pay more even for invalidated patents!!! rotten judges....

5. StringCheese01

Posts: 64; Member since: Jan 27, 2012


6. quakan

Posts: 1418; Member since: Mar 02, 2011

Please tell me you didn't make that Judge Koh picture your avatar after you read this. -_-

7. StringCheese01

Posts: 64; Member since: Jan 27, 2012

Haha no no i've had this avatar since the early days of the trial

26. Nathan_ingx

Posts: 4769; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

Yup, I've seen that thumbnail. :)

9. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

It will be interesting to see how Judge Koh rules on damages, given the recent invalidation of Apple patents that I believe are at the heart of the trial.... Apple could be looking at a Pyrrhic victory.

12. Dunknown

Posts: 84; Member since: Jul 23, 2012

I think it is better to banned Samsung in this particular world. The phone they produced is getting worse. Like the Galasy S3. Nothing much in there, it shows laggness. And sometimes the screen froze and restart. I just use it for about six month and it shows this kind of shows for me. I think I should swith back to Iphone or maybe Nokia Lumia 920 that kinda attract me a lot.

14. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

That why you Dunknown that S3 is good. Apple fan pretending to own high end smartphone. iPhone is an dumb phone too restrictive to be called a smartphone.

19. chaoticrazor

Posts: 2347; Member since: Aug 28, 2012

you both idiots, one he's obviously letting off a load of bs, the s3 is a great phone. but second for you to then say the iphone is a dumb phone is bs too.............why do you have to be all defensive and attack other product instead of only setting him straight is beyond fanboyism.

38. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

iPhone is a dumb phone to me. You don't have to agree. Besides, i only pay for item that would serve my long term interest. Apple want to remove choices, so i buy samsung to defend it. Lawsuit do cost lots of money and apple has truckload of it and are bullying competitors with lawsuits. I am not a fanboy of any brand. I only serve my interest.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.