Samsung and Apple allowed to add products to lawsuit, such as the Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy S III

Samsung and Apple allowed to add products to lawsuit, such as the Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy S III
U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal is allowing both Apple and Samsung to add products to each side's claims in the second patent trial between both tech titans to be held in San Jose. The first trial resulted in a $1.05 billion verdict in favor of Apple. Post-trial motions will be heard by Judge Lucy Koh on December 6th. This second trial was added by Apple with a filing made last February claiming that certain Samsung smartphones, including the Samsung GALAXY Nexus, violated eight of its patents. Judge Koh issued an injunction against sales of the phone in June, but her actions were considered an abuse of her discretion by a Federal Appeals Court last month and the injunction was overturned.

In the second suit, Samsung denied the charges and filed a counterclaim against Apple and its iPhone and iPad, claiming that Apple's iconic devices infringed on eight of its patents. On September 21st, after threatening to do so, Samsung filed to add the 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."

source: Reuters

FEATURED VIDEO

25 Comments

1. MeoCao unregistered

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

20. Droid_X_Doug

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.

24. -box-

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.

28. VZWuser76

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.

30. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Born and raised here, only have left for short vacations. I think your own personal perception is clouding your judgement.

31. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

I agree with Meo - the average American is clueless when it comes to tech.

2. Izzy_V

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.

9. StringCheese01

Posts: 64; Member since: Jan 27, 2012

I agree. UGH this is sooo stupid! It's just stifling innovation, hasn't all this suing and fighting been enough?

3. lilg29

Posts: 89; Member since: Sep 14, 2011

Oh god... just let me get my gs3 before you do anything stupid against the tyrant.

4. Nickmfnjackson

Posts: 101; Member since: Jan 21, 2010

Forgot the products. They should just have specially selected warriors and said warriors should battle in an arena to the death over patent licenses.

5. maryaaadil

Posts: 146; Member since: Apr 07, 2012

It is US only where sammy have lost big one Elsewhere SS have won...

6. tiara6918

Posts: 2263; Member since: Apr 26, 2012

Let's just hope for luck on samsung to win the case against apple otherwise big losses may happen to the company

7. app_droid_soft

Posts: 42; Member since: Sep 09, 2012

R.I.P samsung

19. hinz10

Posts: 15; Member since: Sep 12, 2012

In the US of A maybe, but in the rest of the real world it will never happen.

8. ghostnexus

Posts: 96; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

So much for innovation

10. blackspot

Posts: 102; Member since: Nov 14, 2012

Thumbs down to Patent Wars & thumbs up to Innovation Wars!

11. Kronic

Posts: 321; Member since: Sep 11, 2012

Both sides should sign a licensing agreement to put an end to litigation in the tech industry.

17. someones4

Posts: 627; Member since: Sep 16, 2012

No way. HTC did it because they are spineless. Samsung did nothing wrong and they have as much right as Apple to protect their intellectual properties.

26. Aeires unregistered

They tried to do that but couldn't agree on pricing terms.

14. phil2n

Posts: 519; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

here we go, here we go, here we go again!!!!!

15. blackspot

Posts: 102; Member since: Nov 14, 2012

Lol! Yeah, this has been dragging on for some time now.

16. MC1123

Posts: 1256; Member since: Nov 12, 2012

oh no...here we go again!!!

21. dan86

Posts: 298; Member since: Mar 17, 2012

Apple is just frustrated. Jellybean is ages ahead of iOS.

22. Aeires unregistered

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.

23. ronjr123

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.

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.