Samsung and Apple allowed to add products to lawsuit, such as the Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy S III
posted by Alan F. / Nov 15, 2012, 11:15 PM
Apple iPhone 5 as an Apple device that infringed on one of Samsung's patents. In response, Apple added the Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1, the Samsung Galaxy S III and the Android 4.1 operating system to the Samsung GALAXY Nexus with its claim.
In making his ruling to allow Samsung to add the latest Apple iPhone model to the suit, Judge Grewal said Samsung acted with "reasonable diligence" in requesting that the court add the phone to its claim. Even though Apple did not oppose the addition of the Apple iPhone 5 to the case, Judge Grewal told Apple's lawyers to "think twice before opposing similar amendments reflecting other newly released products — e.g. the iPad 4 and iPad mini — that Samsung may propose in the near future."
I think SS should not agree to trial by jury this time, ordinary people in the jury will act on their prejudice and Apple is US company, SS is not
posted on Nov 15, 2012, 11:26 PM 12
Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010
Samsung wasn't well-served by their trial counsel in the lawsuit heard by judge Koh. They should have pursued a trial strategy based on invalidating Apple's patents. Google pursued an invalidity strategy in Oracle v. Google and cleaned Oracle's clock. Where the company is based has very little impact on a jury in CA. San Jose has a very diverse jury pool. Texas or Arizona might be another matter, though.
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 3:31 AM 6
Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012
Or perhaps somewhere in the midwest. There's less a sense of "gotta have it" for phones, as they're not used as frequently in public as on the coasts, and there's less walking around (like NYC where you walk or taxi everywhere), so they'lre less of a status symbol and more of a tool. Granted there's still a strong sense of patriotism, but also of fair play and justice, and presenting facts that apple doesn't manufacture in the US (Samsung does) and apple has a third party make all of its products in China (though I think Foxconn is building a factory in Brazil) would resonate with the jury members and remove any "home field advantage". In theory, anyway.
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 7:56 AM 1
Posts: 4974; Member since: Mar 04, 2010
You've never been to the Midwest have you? I live here. While we may not have the population of the coasts, people are just as obsessed about mobile as anywhere else. Any store by the big 4 carriers is usually packed. I currently live in a town with a population of 1500, and the smartphone vs regular phones is around 50/50. I don't quite get the status symbol/tool comment. I am obsessed with mobile, because they are great tools. Currently I've got 3 smartphones, a tablet, & a couple laptops. Sorry if I'm coming off as a d**k, but it bugs me when people say something about where I live that's untrue.
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 8:36 AM 0
Posts: 216; Member since: Jul 07, 2012
Might as well have said "Samsung and apple allowed to add fuel to the fire". Samsung needs to win in order to make the tide turn in the consumers' favor. Losing will give apple another incentive to continue on its lawsuit rampage.
posted on Nov 15, 2012, 11:26 PM 11
Posts: 321; Member since: Sep 11, 2012
Both sides should sign a licensing agreement to put an end to litigation in the tech industry.
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 12:17 AM 0
Posts: 519; Member since: Apr 30, 2012
here we go, here we go, here we go again!!!!!
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 12:36 AM 4
If they have to reveal all the paperwork mentioned in the first trial, I'm willing to bet Apple will drop this lawsuit. Keeping their true profit information secret is worth more than $1 billion they won the first time. If you take into account Samsung will be allowed to use all their prior art, it's doubtful Apple will win, or if they do, they won't be getting as much this time at it. Keeping the public in the dark on how much they really overpay for iProducts is worth a lot more to their image and retaining loyal customers.
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 5:59 AM 3
Posts: 88; Member since: Feb 16, 2012
Just hope SS doesn't use the same group of lawyers. If they do, hopefully they have learned their lesson. Jury foreman issues aside, I still think SS lost that last trial on their own. One can only hope they would allow video cameras with live streaming! Of course Apple would never allow that.
posted on Nov 16, 2012, 7:18 AM 2
Send a warning to post author
Send a warning to Selected user.
The user has 0 warnings currently.
Next warning will result in ban!
Ban user and delete all posts
Message to PhoneArena moderator (optional):