Samsung takes its patent fight with Apple all the way to the Supreme Court

Samsung takes its patent fight with Apple all the way to the Supreme Court
Earlier this month, Samsung said that it would pay Apple $548 million by the end of the business day today after being ordered to fork over that amount to its rival. That check would take care of the first patent infringement case that originally awarded Apple close to $1 billion. Judge Lucy Koh (you remember her, right?) eventually called for a new trial on the damages.

Even though some might consider Samsung lucky to get away with paying roughly half of the original verdict, the company itself doesn't think so. Samsung has filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the highest court in the land to overturn the verdict. Samsung says that the jury was not given enough information to understand the patent issues.

Cases heard in the Supreme Court are selected by the justices, so there is no guarantee that the case will end up being heard by the Court. If it is, both Samsung and Apple will make 30 minute oral arguments as well as file briefs on the merits of the case. Samsung claims that current patent law is not suitable for modern times, which is the hook needed to get the Supreme Court to hear the case. Samsung adds that "If the current legal precedent stands, it could diminish innovation, stifle competition, pave the way for design patent troll litigation and negatively impact the economy and consumers."

source: Re/Code via AndroidCentral



5. TBomb

Posts: 1634; Member since: Dec 28, 2012

I think they were the reason the price was dropped (price samsung had to pay) , but others were still kept. Not sure though.

12. sgodsell

Posts: 7519; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

Samsung should just pay, then add on a F"$k you charge for the components that Apple purchases from Samsung. Besides Apple Zealot's have been proven that they will pay anything for a low tech Apple device.

18. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

I know Samsung would never settle but its not to their best interests. All indicator show that they could not get far without major funding into lobbying Congress into the 'right' judgement.

57. shm224

Posts: 296; Member since: Mar 19, 2015

@joey_sfb: this particular appeal has a wide support of many US companies and industries, as well as the legal community/academia, so will see. It's unlikely that Barbara Boxer or Mike Lee is going to send letters to congress to change the law -- as they did to reverse Apple's ITC loss a couple of years back -- but all US manufacturing companies would be adversely effected by this, so it's in all their interest to see this ruling reversed.

23. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Much like you and the ones who blindly follow Android?

29. iushnt

Posts: 3141; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

People don't blindly follow Android. People blindly follow Apple.

55. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Have you seen Android fans in some of the Apple articles?

59. iushnt

Posts: 3141; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

Do you visit Apple Insider and Macrumors? See Apple fans in any article there.

49. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

That's stupid.

56. shm224

Posts: 296; Member since: Mar 19, 2015

@sgodsell : like store-only gift cards?

27. tedkord

Posts: 17453; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

No, two more were invalidated since the trial, both of which were included in the judgement. That doesn't include the sham of a trial, with a jury foreman who held a nebulous patent like Apple's, who introduced his own evidence in deliberations and who ignored the judges instructions. A man who convinced the jury that prior art didn't apply because the software woodland run on an iPhone, then discarded that reasoning for Samsung.

35. MrElectrifyer

Posts: 3960; Member since: Oct 21, 2014

41. Spedez

Posts: 542; Member since: Aug 29, 2014

Pinch zoom and bounce scroll patents make no sense because A I'm pretty sure Apple didn't invent those B they are "common sense" GUI patterns just like e.g swiping. Only Apple (and US gov) can be such a dick that they actually (allow) patent such things.

43. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Glad they put a stop to it. Otherwise, Apple will become the ultimate patent hog! Patenting the letter, 'i' then move on to patent a certain words like magical, incredible, amazing, awesome. Ultimately, graduate to patenting a certain feeling or experience.

50. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Yes several patents were invalidated, but these were not taken into consideration for hat last $548M. That is one reason Samsung is still arguing the point. The fact is, Samsung should have to pay almost NOTHING because the patents are invalid. That is why the case needs to be reheard and the value of what is infringing still to be hashed as to its value. Which in reality should be $0

2. Commentator

Posts: 3723; Member since: Aug 16, 2011

Neat! *Grabs caviar*

38. AlikMalix unregistered

You know what? I don't even care anymore about this trial. This turkey was done. Long long time ago.

39. tedkord

Posts: 17453; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

The problem is, the turkey was rotten.

42. AlikMalix unregistered

perhaps... either way, apple had a patent, samsung violated it. If the patent office revoked it - the USPO should pay for the fees and resources wasted. Because when apple sued = they had legal grounds to do so. (in a nutshell). I'm just tired of it and no longer care which way it goes - just get it over with: either samsung pays or it doesn't - and be done.

44. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

I respect Apple for creating a great platform that many enjoy using and i hope they would innovate to be even better. Patenting a round rectangular touch screen and tried to prevent others from competing is really a low blow and the sad truth is they got away with it at least in Samsung'case. Samsung should not be paying for USPO's lax and its constant flip flopping decision making that beg one to wonder whether there more than meet the eyes.

45. AlikMalix unregistered

Just to verify, it's a device with rounded corners, full glass front, round home button, with aluminum back, and so on... or something along those lines...

47. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

It wasn't only a round rectangle...there was other info in the patent. But I still find it funny. But apple is all about brand image so it would make sense they want to protect all image of their phone.

51. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

For a phone they didn't even design in the first place? Sony designed it.

3. TezzaBP

Posts: 274; Member since: May 18, 2015

Hoo boy this is gonna be fuuuuuun

4. Unordinary unregistered

If ya cant beat em', keep tryin'.

28. tedkord

Posts: 17453; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

If you don't get justice, keep trying. And it's worked. The judgement was cut nearly in half, and two more of the patents involved have been invalidated since.

36. NoToFanboys

Posts: 3231; Member since: Oct 03, 2015

I don't like siding with you tedkord, but that Unordinary guy is more annoying, he will support Apple no matter what they do. Geez fanboys are annoying.

58. Unordinary unregistered

I actually dont like the fact that those bums in Cupertino made my iPhone 6S+ speaker more rattly like the Note 4, I dont like how there isnt better sound, from a company that prides themselves on music, I dont like how My 6S+ only lasts 2.5 days instead of 5 days...wake up Apple, its 2016 almost; I dont like how they arent pushing innovation AS MUCH as they used to because there is barely any competition. Just because you dont like my comments doesnt mean I will die on the cross for Apple, like most of you Android fools will do for Google or Samsung lol.

6. jesus_sheep

Posts: 279; Member since: Apr 18, 2015

In a democratic country why do individuals like the judge take decisions? It should be a vote!

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 or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.