MacNN Forums (http://forums.macnn.com/)
-   Tech News (http://forums.macnn.com/tech-news/)
-   -   Apple opposes Samsung rubber-banding retrial request (http://forums.macnn.com/113/tech-news/502467/apple-opposes-samsung-rubber-banding-retrial/)

 
NewsPoster Jul 23, 2013 08:00 PM
Apple opposes Samsung rubber-banding retrial request
Yesterday, in the latest bout of gamesmanship between Apple and Samsung in Judge Lucy Koh's courtroom, Apple filed a motion opposing Samsung's request for an entirely new patent trial on the '381 "rubber-banding" patent. Samsung has already challenged the patent that the Korean company was found to be violating in the federal patent trial last year, but is filing for the new trial based on statements that Apple made defending the patent before the US Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) in a series of <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/290311==http://www.electronista.com/articles/13/06/13/should.provide.ammunition.in.cases.against.samsung/" rel='nofollow'>invalidation hearings</a>.<br />
<br />
Apple narrowed the scope of the patent claim after the USPTO process to deny it covered animations "in which the specific purpose or cause of the computer code that generates the snap back effect is anything other than edge alignment." Samsung <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/289348==http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/07/samsung-asks-for-new-trial-on-apples.html" rel='nofollow'>contends</a> that had this narrowing happened <em>before</em> last year's US trial, the jury might not have ruled the way it did, and awarded Apple <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/290309==http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/08/24/willful.infringement.finding.could.triple.damages/" rel='nofollow'>over a billion dollars</a>.<br />
<br />
Apple opposes Samsung's motion on several points, most notably that Apple's statements during the patent reexamination process took place nine months after the trial. Additionally, Apple continues to claim that Samsung's arguments that it isn't infringing is fundamentally incorrect. Apple also denies that the statements that it made during the patent reexamination case can be interpreted the way that Samsung did in its appeal filing. Finally, the patent invalidation challenge (likely begun by Samsung in the first place) is years away from a definitive conclusion.<br />
<br />
Patent analyst <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/290310==http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/07/two-weeks-ago-samsung-filed-motion-for.html" rel='nofollow'>Florian Mueller</a> believes that Judge Koh won't hold a new trial on this matter, which would further delay the limited damages retrial scheduled for November. He also notes that "it wouldn't require much effort on the court's part to issue a final judgment" on the patent in question, and that decision could easily go either way -- overruling the investigation.<br />
 
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:56 AM.

Copyright © 2005-2007 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2