updated 09:47 pm EDT, Thu August 16, 2012
Exasperated judge 'pathologically optimistic' of settlement
The next-to-last day of witness testimony in the Apple versus Samsung mobile phone patent case has wrapped up. During the course of testimony, Samsung rested its case "with reservations," reserving the right to call a handful of witnesses if needed. Eleven witnesses were heard today, testifying on a range of topics from Samsung's variable financial data, expected damages, and a brief discussion of fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing issues.
Following the first witnesses for the day on Samsung's numerous financial statements, Judge Lucy Koh chastised both sides of the suit, waving in the air a list of 22 witnesses yet to be called, and 75 pages of objections to the witnesses. Clearly exasperated, Koh said that "unless you're smoking crack, you know these witnesses aren't going to be called."
Samsung called to the stand Dr. Ramamirtham Sukumar, an expert in consumer and marketing research studies. In brief testimony driven by Samsung attorneys mindful of the judge's timer, he corroborated Samsung's claims that Apple violated photo emailing, gallery bookmarks, and background-music playback patents. Also queried very rapidly, Samsung damages expert Vincent O'Brien calculated that Apple owes between 11 and 19 cents per patent, for a total of $22 million.
As anticipated, patent expert David Teece took the stand for more time than Sukumar and O'Brien combined. Teece estimated that Apple should pay between $290 million and $399 million in royalties if the jury finds Samsung's patents were infringed. Apple's cross-examination focused on FRAND patents, and reiterated that Samsung requested Apple pay licensing fees in July 2011, with valuation more in line with FRAND amounts than Teece's numbers. Following Apple's cross-examination, Samsung rested its case.
Apple's rebuttal case began with Apple designer Tony Blevins taking the stand. Blevins stated that Apple pays about $12 for each Intel processor claimed as infringing by Samsung in yesterday's testimony. Emilie Kim, a former Apple engineer who worked on the iPhone photo application, stepped through its usage and interactions with other applications such as Mail. The next witness, UC-Irvine computer scientist Paul Dourish, reiterated Kim's claims of non-infringement. Samsung spent very little time in Kim's case and no time with Dourish in cross-examination, "in the interest of time."
In a bit of theatrics, computer science expert Tony Givargis rebutted Samsung's claim that Apple infringed its patent on background music playback, playing Louis Armstrong on a Sony Ericsson phone as he performed various functions on the device. After Samsung's lawyers yet again cited a shortage of time, the Judge retorted with how many minutes each side had used for cross-examination, and noted that "Samsung made a choice" in spending more time cross-examining Apple witnesses than Apple spent on questioning them in the first place.
Two final witnesses were called to end the day--Apple expert Mani Srivastava rebutted Samsung's claims on the photo e-mail patent with only a quick rebuttal by Samsung, and Carnegie Mellon professor Hyong Kim discussed the Intel power-management chip issue again.
Near the end of the trial for the day, Apple and Samsung attempted to trim each other's claims from the trial, with the judge deferring it for future discussion. A ruling on the motions is expected before the end of the weekend. One final day of testimony remains, with Apple having three hours and 53 minutes remaining, and Samsung left with 46 minutes.