Patent that Apple used in recent trial against Samsung, found to be invalid by USPTO

Patent that Apple used in recent trial against Samsung, found to be invalid by USPTO
Samsung filed paperwork aimed at Judge Lucy Koh, to inform her that the USPTO has rejected Apple's claim to U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172. That patent deals with predictive text input, and Apple claimed in the latest trial with Samsung, that the latter had infringed on it. To be more specific, claim 18 of the '172 patent was rejected by the agency, due to prior art.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that an infringement verdict on an invalid patent, isn't worth the price of the ink that the decision was written with. As a result, the $119.6 million verdict won by Apple in the second patent trial against Samsung, could be reduced. After all, the jury did agree with Apple and ruled that Samsung had infringed on that patent.

Earlier this week, Apple and Samsung agreed to halt all patent battles between the two tech titans, outside of the U.S. Sammy's filing might hasten some sort of settlement inside the States.
  



source: Scribd via FossPatents

FEATURED VIDEO

46 Comments

1. 0xFFFF

Posts: 3806; Member since: Apr 16, 2014

This is what happens when someone at Apple forgets to make the required USPTO payment.

2. techperson211

Posts: 1280; Member since: Feb 27, 2014

Wow they've just noticed it? Really?

39. NexusKoolaid

Posts: 493; Member since: Oct 24, 2011

>>> "U.S. Patent No. 8,074,172"

40. NexusKoolaid

Posts: 493; Member since: Oct 24, 2011

Sorry – had an issue during my first reply. What I was going to say was this: The USPTO receives over 250k patent applications a year from domestic applicants, and roughly the same amount filed from foreign entities. That’s over 1300 patents applications daily. I remember reading that the average patent application word count is somewhere between 4000 and 8000 words. Additionally, most patents use very broad and vague verbiage to help increase the scope of the patent. They are, IOW, being swamped by the Samsungs, Apples and Microsofts of the world, and there simply isn’t time for exhaustive research on each new filing. About the only way they can find these problems is if someone else does the research and tips them off (probably Samsung in this case).

42. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

USTPO are bunch of lazy a$$e$ and gives everything to Apple

3. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

And have Obama use the veto in the time of need.

21. Ashoaib

Posts: 3251; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

@0xffff.. do you mean under the table payments?

30. AlikMalix unregistered

Prove it, or change name to Troll...

33. v_i_r_u_s

Posts: 1; Member since: Aug 08, 2014

lol, you must have a lot of time on your hands OR Apple's paying you to troll these forums !

38. Ashoaib

Posts: 3251; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

"Prove it, or change name to Troll..." either you are very innocent or just------ you are asking that question which is related to "under the table"... if it can be proven by a common person then it is not under the table... by the way, you asked to change the name to troll... I will ask you first, did you changed yours? no, right.... did apple changed it name to patent troll? no, right?

49. AlikMalix unregistered

I'm just asking someone who makes an accusation to show some proof, otherwise it's not true - thus just a troll post. Your proof is that apple dealing with patent office "under the table" so there's no proof is proof is just stupid. You cannot call suspicions made by apple-hater as proof. If there's some evidence that Apple is paying Patent Office for favors (other then regular fees), it should be noted otherwise it's just anti-apple trolling. So I accused him of being a troll by "change your name to troll". I would make the same argument for Google or Samsung. The next item I want to address is accusations that Apple is a patent troll. A patent troll is an organization that buys up or files for patents and only uses them to sue others for copying, or coincidentally making identical applications. Apple has bought and filed for patents and used them in their products that made them unique. Others try to copy their ecosystem, the feel, or otherwise look (see my links above) - and Apple practicing their right to protect these core elements. Samsung does it, Google does it, Msft does it. There are many elements that I see in other products that I've seen Apple introduce that there was never a lawsuit for. But there are some things that are blatant copying that need to be dealt with. I always said, that Android would not be where it is without Apple and Apple would not be where it is now without Android. They both push each other and copy each other where ever they legally can. Samsung just ends up overstepping their boundary sometimes, and not just with Apple.

4. rantao333

Posts: 345; Member since: May 21, 2013

come on, comrade, its time to comment!

5. ausnote2

Posts: 84; Member since: Dec 07, 2012

and apple fanboys wonder why there is so much hate against apple. Boycott apple is the only way to steer them to the correct path.

15. AlikMalix unregistered

You do realize that Samsung has lost much bigger lawsuits from Apple that were and still validated? Samsung did infringe and paid, and not only to Apple - other companies too... So lets boycott Apple because they're trying to protect as much of their business as legally possible. Here's another perspective: For example, why hasn't Apple added some of the basic Android features that some iOS users are asking for? Maybe, just maybe, Samsung patented something and Apple is trying to honor that... You surely dont think that Apple isn't capable of adding a few code lines to their OS? Some of you are so quick to judge Apple for suing all the time, when in fact, it has avoided infringing on other companies Patents like Google or Samsung. (I know that Apple lost a small counter-suit here and there, but nothing as huge as what Samsung was guilty of in the beginning of their smartphone campaign). If morality is concerned, it seems that Apple respects patented ideas, pays for them if they must, or trades their stuff for others (see MSFT). But I see Samsung blatantly going at it, and not just Apple, Dyson, MSFT, etc. and hope no one catches them, and when they do get sued, delay the process for as long as possible, and when loosing, try to counter-sue, and still end up paying, over and over (I can bring up some links to prove my point if you're lazy like me to search for them).

18. tedkord

Posts: 17078; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

The first trial is under appeal, and Samsung has not paid a dime. And much like this example, patents from the first trial have since been invalidated. Apple respects patents and pays for them? They still haven't paid a single dime for Samsung's FRAND patents they admit they are infringing and have been for years. They told a judge they would only honor her decision on the price of they liked it. They were found to infringe Samsung patents in this very same trial without paying. They were also found by the ITC to engage in reverse holdups, so egregiously that the panel called for an import ban, an almost unheard of step in a FRAND proceeding. Apple respects nothing and no one. It is an arrogant company, though I think less so under Tim Cook.

22. AlikMalix unregistered

Wait you mean, apple is trying to defend itself when it was accused or invalidated? No... really?

37. VZWuser76

Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010

Was Samsung in the wrong in trying to use FRAND patents to get a sales ban? Yes. But the problem is that the benefit for companies to allow their patents to be made a FRAND patent is guaranteed compensation. A FRAND patent is essentially an industry standard. If there was no FRAND system, you'd have a system similar to Bluray vs HD DVD. What the FRAND system is trying to accomplish is to try and have some sort of industry standard, while at the same time making it easier for other companies to use the standard AND guaranteeing the inventor compensation. If it wasn't in place, there would be tons of litigation every time a company went to use said patent. The problem is Apple has been using quite a few FRAND patents and so far not compensating the inventor. Another thing that's a problem is since most all of Apple's patents aren't covered under FRAND, it puts them in a superior position. Say Apple has some patents that Samsung wants to use, and Samsung has some FRAND patents that Apple wants to use. Under FRAND, Samsung must license them for the same amount they license them to any other company. Since Apple's patents aren't bound by FRAND, they can request whatever they want from Samsung. It's conceivable that they could combine how much they want for their patent plus the amount they'd have to pay for Samsung's FRAND patents. IMO that's an unfair advantage. The reason FRAND patents are sometimes referred to as Standard & Essential is because they are just that, essential for a device to function. So shouldn't something that's essential be worth as much or more than say something that makes it look nice but serves no essential value, or a convenience? I have no problem with Apple protecting their IP, but others have to be able to do the same as well. Some of these FRAND patents that Apple is guilty of infringing on go back to some of the first iPhones, which means they've been using them for nothing for years. I also don't agree with trying to eliminate competition through litigation. So far, Apple seems to go after their largest competitor, currently Samsung. When HTC was their largest competitor, they went hard after them. If others are guilty of infringing as well, why are they not also taking them to court? IMHO there is a simple solution, if both parties are need in patents from the other, then license them for the same rate between the companies. For example, if company A has 5 patents in question and company B has 10. They license them for $2 per patent. Company B will get more because they have more patents (also depending on how many devices each company sells). Another solution is eliminate negotiating patent prices. Set up a tier system. Certain patents are $A, some are $B, some are $C, etc. Depending on the type of patent, there is a set value. That would eliminate companies overvaluing patents. And if someone uses the patents without paying that set amount, fines or bans can be levied.

23. Ashoaib

Posts: 3251; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

hey bro.. apple doesnt respect the patents of anyone... it is uspto who is willing to give patents of each n everything to apple... beside that samsung is lossing bcoz trails are always in US courts and US courts favor their own company, thats nothing hidden.. see the value of money awarded to apple.. even jury was found favoring apple in prevoius trails...

25. AlikMalix unregistered

How about this? Samsung loses patent lawsuit against Apple on home turf of Koreahttp://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/samsung-loses-patent-lawsuit-against-apple-on-home-turf-of-korea/ Or this? Samsung Loses Another Apple Patent Case This Time In Germanyhttp://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/22/samsung-loses-another-apple-patent-case-this-time-in-germany/

28. Ashoaib

Posts: 3251; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

these are just two... also google how many cases apple lost abroad and how much money apple won abroad... the reference which you are posting are for those cases which samsung filed as a counter attack... these were not filed by apple... search those cases which apple filed and lost... also search for those cases which apple won and how small was the panelty on samsung as compare to what they got in US... this is not bcoz samsung didnt infringed abroad, this is just bcoz US courts are favoring apple... you didnt read about the infamous vito of obama? how the president came to safe guard their beloved apple

29. AlikMalix unregistered

My point was that there's no favoritism toward Apple in US or abroad, it's what people tell themselves to sleep better (i'm trolling). But seriously you're just proving my point. "jury found favoring apple" um, yeah, if company A proves that they were wronged by company B, and company B cannot counter-prove it then a jury will favor company A. The thing with OBAMA, yeah, I though this was a biased move by him, I hate his decision for this - I hate most of his decisions, but that's another topic. It makes it seem that American companies cannot win unless president helps - WTF... Whether US courts are favoring Apple or not, well that's subjective, dont you think? I understand I'm partial to Apple products, but you cant cry foul every time an American company wins... Plus I posted links where Apple won in other countries, there are many more, I just dont want to post it as many aren't going to appreciate it anyway. I bet half of you, that i'm debating with, didnt even click on most of them - go ahead some of them are pictures..

36. Ashoaib

Posts: 3251; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

right! we dont click those links which you have pasted just bcoz we read those links back when these reports came out and fresh... most of us dont want to look at again after months/years... by the way jury was favoring, it is not a logical discussion of campany A or company B, some jurers were found as a fan of apple... how you can select a jurer who is a fan and assume 100% impartiality... if we go by your logics of A & B then its a human pshyche that humen tends to have soft corner for those who they admire/fans...

45. pept68

Posts: 38; Member since: Apr 05, 2013

Your funny... Apple respects no one!!! They will fight in courtroom A about rounded corner and in courtroom B refuse to pay for an infringed patent. "For years Apple refused to pay fair value for the VirnetX patents. Apple says they don't infringe. But Apple developers testified that they didn’t pay any attention to anyone’s patents when developing their system." 1st lawsuit cost alost 400 mil and the second should be more as the second includes products like the iPhone 5, fifth-generation iPod touch, fourth-Generation iPad, and iPad mini. If apple is as just as you claim.... then why don't they pay for the essential patents they violated and move on?? The president stopped the ban, but they still haven't paid a dime. Your bias, is obvious to everyone but you.

48. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Based on most of the cases, Samsung only lost in the USA. In other countries Samsung didn't lose or were simply asked to make some changes. However it costed them nothing and they paid nothing. I can't remember if it was Germany or Australia...but Samsung was asked to make some changes to the Tab. They med the needed changes and Apple said "it isn't enough". The Judge said, it was enough and granted the resale of the Tab. What Apple wants is for every OEM to make their devices clunky and ugly so that the prettiest one with be theirs and that is all people will buy. This trade-dress BS is just that. If you look at this case, Apple is basically suing over the same things they tried to being up in the Apple vs Microsoft cases. Apple lost that case. They should have lost this one too.

6. GreekGeek

Posts: 1276; Member since: Mar 22, 2014

A. P. T. O.

7. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

LOL I find you one of the newest upcoming trolls, but I approve of this message.

9. Vexify

Posts: 570; Member since: Jun 16, 2014

What ever happened to Sauce?

11. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

He deactivated his account awhile back. Where have you been?

13. Vexify

Posts: 570; Member since: Jun 16, 2014

Interesting. I liked him. Good troll lol. Ive been in Europe for 3 years studying abroad lol. Rarely visited this site so made a new account because I forgot my old credentials (didn't know them by heart, always used autofill to log in and that was gone once I moved back into the US)

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.