Printed from http://www.electronista.com

Apple posts $2.6M bond for Galaxy Tab 10.1 injunction

updated 10:35 am EDT, Thu June 28, 2012

Samsung already hoping to stay injunction

Apple posted a needed $2.6 million bond almost immediately after a preliminary injunction was granted against US Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales, according to FOSS Patents. The money ensures that Samsung can be compensated financially to a degree if the injunction is successfully appealed. Samsung has in fact already filed a motion to stay the injunction, pending an upcoming appeal; alternately, it may accept a stay pending the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision on the motion to stay.

The company argues that the original court "erred by issuing a preliminary injunction based on a stale and incomplete record," and that the injunction is "improper based on the current evidence," especially since the judge who issued it -- Lucy Koh, representing the Northern District of California -- did not allow Samsung to present evidence.

Apple and Samsung are due to go to trial in the US over a series of patents in late July. The case is generally tipped to go in Apple's favor, as Samsung has lost many related legal battles, including motions against Apple expert reports. Conversely, Apple has had many portions of Samsung's expert reports excluded.



By Electronista Staff
Post tools:

TAGS :

toggle

Comments

  1. Inkling

    Dedicated MacNNer

    Joined: Jul 2006

    -6

    $2.6 Million and favoritism

    A $2.6 million bond to cover any losses that Samsung might experience for not being able to sell the Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the U.S. market.? That's ridiculous.

    Imagine you've just parked a brand-new luxury auto that cost you $100,000. Out of nowhere, a driver slams into it, obviously totaling it. You try to hold him, but he runs off, as he goes he tosses a $5 bill on the ground that, he says, is his bond that he'll get in touch with you later and pay the real damages whatever they are.

    He's being more generous in that $5 bond than this judge is when she calls for Apple, with almost $100 billion in cash reserves, to post a piddling $2.6 million bond. That'd only cover a tiny proportion of Samsung's losses.

    I nasty thought just passed through my mind. Apple in one of the few bright spots in California's otherwise morbid economy. Samsung is Korean and one of Apple's most successful competitors. Could that be a factor in this remark about what the court is including and excluding, as the article notes:

    "The case is generally tipped to go in Apple's favor, as Samsung has lost many related legal battles, including motions against Apple expert reports. Conversely, Apple has had many portions of Samsung's expert reports excluded."

    It's certainly suspicious.

    And personally, I want everyone on both sides to loose all their disputes, if that's legally possible. Everyone, Apple and Samsung included, should license their patents and compete on the quality and price of their products.

  1. climacs

    Forum Regular

    Joined: Sep 2001

    0

    why

    should any patent holder be forced to license their patents?

    I am pretty sure Big Pharma would have something to say about that.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Sound Blaster Roar Bluetooth speaker

There could very well be a new king of the hill for Bluetooth speakers, with Sound Blaster's recent entry into the marketplace. Bringi ...

Kenu Airframe Plus

Simple, stylish and effective, the Kenu Airframe + portable car mount is the latest addition to Kenu's lineup. Released earlier this y ...

Plantronics Rig Surround 7.1 headset

Trying to capture the true soundscape of video games can be a daunting task. Looking to surround-sound home theater options, users hav ...

Sponsor

toggle

Most Commented

 
toggle

Popular News