Follow
STATES CHRONICLE – Samsung and Apple have been dueling with the occasion of numerous patent lawsuits for six years now. The company alleges that its rival infringed patent rights for mobile design. However, Samsung intends to avoid or lower the multimillion dollar award it has to pay to Apple. After years of patent lawsuits with no conclusive outcome, a judge ordered the dispute to return to the original court.
Apple and Samsung Went through Numerous Patent Lawsuits in Six Years Only to Return to the Original Court
Samsung failed to receive a positive reaction when it requested retrial from Judge Koh, then the Federal Circuit. However, on Sunday Judge Lucy Koh gave a new direction to the legal battle between Apple and Samsung. At the official’s order, a new retrial will take place within the original court.
The new lawsuit will decide whether Samsung should indeed cover Apple’s $399 million award for patent infringement or not. This new legal dispute ignores a December decision coming from the US Supreme Court. It was only ten months ago when the court closed the case claiming that Samsung has no justifiable reason to cover compensations for Apple.
Judge Koh Claimed that the Supreme Court Didn’t Respect the Letter of Law in a December Ruling
“The Court finds that the jury instructions given at trial did not accurately reflect the law.”
The original award of $399 million represented the compensation Apple should receive based on Samsung’s profits that were recorded with its Galaxy line. However, the Supreme Court considered that the award should reflect only those parts of devices that were copied from its rival.
In the lawsuit that Apple opened in 2011 against Samsung, documents claimed that Galaxy S copied iPhone’s design. The similar elements concerned the rectangular front face that features round edges and the grid of colorful icons against a black screen.
On the other hand, the law requires that the entire product should be taken into consideration when it comes to patent lawsuits. This is the conclusion that Judge Koh reached which she also used as leverage to order a new retrial.
Google Facebook and HP advocated for the abolishing of the reward. They claimed that the conclusion of the lawsuit would only set numerous technological advancements back which are beneficial for the modern community. However, other giant companies such as Tiffany, Crocs, and Adidas sided with Apple. They found the reward justifiable.
Image source: 1
