Samsung seeks mistrial as damages retrial goes to jury

Samsung seeks mistrial as damages retrial goes to jury
Both Apple and Samsung presented their closing arguments on Monday, as the retrial between the two rivals was sent to the jury on Tuesday for deliberations. During the original trial, the jury found that several Samsung devices did infringe on Apple's patents. When determining the damages to be awarded to Apple for each infringing Samsung device, the original jury got confused and miscalculated the damages awarded to Apple. The latter received one damage award on some devices even though these particular devices were found by the jury to have infringed on multiple patents.
 
Judge Lucy Koh vacated $400 million of the $1.05 billion that the jury awarded Cupertino based Apple. Now, Apple is seeking a $380 million award while Samsung believes it is only responsible for an additional $52 million to be added to the $650 million that still remains due Apple from the first trial.

Meanwhile, Samsung requested that Judge Koh call a mistrial after statements made by Apple legal representative Harold McElhinny during his 90 minute closing argument. The attorney said that U.S. television manufacturers ended up going bankrupt because they did not protect their patents. Samsung took this as a racial statement and requested the mistrial, which Judge Koh denied. "I don't think what occurred rises to the level of a mistrial, but some remedy might be appropriate to avoid further issues later on," the judge said.


source: AppleInsider

FEATURED VIDEO

55 Comments

1. JojoGo101

Posts: 211; Member since: Dec 17, 2012

I see. Well we know the truth folks, it is evident that Apple went into the future and copied Samsung and is now trying to sue Samsung. Nice try Apple. I got you.

6. xperiaDROID

Posts: 5629; Member since: Mar 08, 2013

Typical greedy hungry-for-money evil fruit, nothing so special about it. :)

10. darkkjedii

Posts: 31289; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

We'll they're about to get fed lotsa $$$

35. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

Thanks to a lot of dumb asses with entitlement issues.

14. Dexxter

Posts: 10; Member since: Nov 04, 2013

You're being sarcastic, right?

33. Ashoaib

Posts: 3297; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Apple can sue on what ever until it is in US... their justice system is very biased... Apple lose every where in the world but US law and courts only favor US, one eyed monters... Apple can sue on sh*t as well, be careful samsung when going to toilet, it may resemble apple's

53. silencer271

Posts: 254; Member since: Apr 05, 2013

spoken like a true idiot. You dont know how R&D works do you? I am assuming not.

2. stealthd unregistered

Samsung is just getting desparate

3. twens

Posts: 1180; Member since: Feb 25, 2012

Look Samsung. Pay those losers already and focus on giving me a 64bit note 4 next yr. Those of us who have tried your phones know you are light years ahead of the competition. Money is not your problem. Innovate more and destroy your haters. Word!!!

11. darkkjedii

Posts: 31289; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Word!!! Lol

4. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Love how the charts leave out the F700.... I await someone to chime in and say it came out after the iPhone.... :) And this iPad : http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/09/samsung-digital-picture-frame-stores-pics-movies-music/ http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/05/samsungs-nano-powered-q1ex-umpc-loses-its-qwerty-at-the-fcc/ Let the copying debates begin!!!!!

5. Pings

Posts: 304; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

Those devices were not allowed in the trail. To me it looked like a Kangaroo court for that reason.

7. vincelongman

Posts: 5723; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

What did expect, US company + US court + US jury Vs Korea company. Apple lost in every other country, they even had to post on their UK site that Samsung didn't copy them.

40. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

vincelongman -- DUDE, Samsung acknowledges they stole from Apple. Haven't you been following the court case?

55. Pings

Posts: 304; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

They had too. Apple also had to admit that Samsung didn't steal from them in the UK court case. This doesn't mean anything.

8. stealthd unregistered

Not sure where you going with this. . . F700 DID come out after the iPhone, are you disputing this? iPhone was first shown off in January 2007 and sold in June, F700 was shown off in February and sold in November. The picture frame is irrelevent, because even if Apple did copy it, they're different devices in different markets. Trade dress only applies to a device in a specific market. And that UMPC looks pretty different from an iPad, the recessed screen pretty easy to spot vs the iPad's all flat glass front, among several other differences.

12. vincelongman

Posts: 5723; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

Actually the F700 was shown off in 2006 and Samsung applied for a design patent in 2006, but was rejected because HTC TyTn had a similar shape and keyboard.

20. stealthd unregistered

They filed the design patent, but according to Samsung's own press release the phone wasn't announced until 2007 http://www.samsung.com/us/news/newsRead.do?news_seq=3516

16. woodshop20

Posts: 459; Member since: Sep 14, 2013

It's funny how Apple chooses to ignore the fact they copied the design of the LG Prada (came out in 2006) and ironically sues someone else for copying their design which was also copied.

17. stealthd unregistered

Are you blind? The prada doesn't even have the iPhones rounded corners, or buttons, or anything that would make it look like a copy.

19. woodshop20

Posts: 459; Member since: Sep 14, 2013

Look more closely. It obviously has rounded corners, a centre home button, and the same rectangular shape. Here's a picture in case you looked at the wrong one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LG_KE850_Prada_Hauptmen%C3%BC.jpg

22. stealthd unregistered

I did look closely. Put your glasses on. The rounded corners aren't the same, the Prada has a rim going around the edge while the original iphone has a tapered rim, and the iPhone has a single round button while the Prada has 3 wide buttons. The only thing they have in common is a (relatively) large touchscreen with black bezel. Samsungs first Galaxy S phones look way more similar to the iPhone than the Prada does.

23. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

"The only thing they have in common is a (relatively) large touchscreen with black bezel." That's exactly part of the reason Apple sued Samsung.

29. MartyK

Posts: 1043; Member since: Apr 11, 2012

I think you need to put yours on.. Here is a description of the lg, please page down to design, you will notice the author will mention the waiting of the iPhone.. http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/lg-ke850-prada-unlocked/4505-6454_7-32316442.html

50. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

"Here is a description of the lg, please page down to design, you will notice the author will mention the waiting of the iPhone.." You try to bring facts into this???? How dare you!!!!

25. Napalm_3nema

Posts: 2236; Member since: Jun 14, 2013

Hilarious. Why do you think LG, who whined and whimpered about the iPhone being a copy, chose not to sue? I'm guessing it has something to do with the iPhone patents all pre-dating the Prada.

31. MartyK

Posts: 1043; Member since: Apr 11, 2012

No, the question is why wouldn't apple sue Lg?, Apple and ifan scream about protecting the iPhone corners, sue lg, Slide to unlock, they sue everyone except http://seekingalpha.com/article/1384161-neonode-strikes-down-apples-slide-to-unlock-patent-for-the-third-time

36. 21babydoll12 unregistered

1st of all when you are an well renown international company (APPLE) that holds hardware design in your own home country (USA). A foreign company (LG) would not sue you for design patent since they do not have a patent in that country (USA). Furthermore, before the birth of the iphone. Many years of R&D was done before the release of the iphone smartphone. This is relevant because in western business methods; funding R&D attributes positive returns. All which APPLE has documented. More so then SAMSUNG or LG. Although this is only supporting evidence, their main evidence is that they PATENT 1st in USA before anyone did. CASE STUDY NINTENDO: Filing for the trademark name GAMEBOY even before its USA/international announcements. Its what you call having a really good legal and marketing team. With all this being said, LG can not and will not legally sue APPLE for design patent infringement in the USA since they never owned a design patent for their beloved PRADA smartphone nor did they officially announce and clear the phone through the FCC. Furthermore, PRADA design house would be the original physical design owners in conjunction with LG. I hope this clarifies your gathered intel a bit more. CHEERS!

39. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

The android camp has always and will continue to use the Prada argument, which is simply and patently STUPID. http://gizmodo.com/203780/itunes-701-has-buttloads-of-mobile-phone-mentions The aforementioned Gizmodo review clearly points out that Apple worked on its device WAY before the LG Prada nonsense. People need to be aware that Apple is secretive and thus hard to discern what it has worked on and when. Look at the date of the Gizmodo -- Apple was clearly working on a smartphone via iTune version 7.0.1.

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.