Apple demands $707 million more in damages from Samsung
updated 01:50 pm EDT, Sat September 22, 2012
Samsung demands new trial, complains about trial time limits
In the latest legal maneuvers between Apple and Samsung, the Cupertino computer manufacturer has asked for an extra $707 million dollars in addition to the billion-dollar verdict won in August. Additionally, Apple has asked for a permanent sales ban on products found to have violated its patents in the trial. Samsung continues to complain that the equal time restrictions imposed on both sides by Judge Lucy Koh prevented them from mounting an effective defense, and have filed for a retrial on that basis.
In the late-Friday motion, Apple is seeking an additional $400 million for design infringement, $135 million for willful infringement of utility patents, $121 million in supplemental damages based on product sales not addressed by the jury's deliberations, and $50 million of prejudgement interest on damages through December 31. Samsung was also found to be willful in its infringement, which allows a tripling of the jury-awarded damages -- were the judge to award that as well as the full requested additional damages, the cost to Samsung would approach $4 billion, and doesn't include Apple's projected legal costs. The $707 million extra demanded by Apple is significantly less than what they could be entitled to, and potentially what the judge could ultimately award.
Apple's sales injunction requests asks that "any of the infringing products or any other product with a feature or features not more than colorably different from any of the infringing feature or features in any of the infringing products" be prohibited from sale in the United States. The wording echoes some previous rulings by Judge Koh, and could potentially include the Galaxy S III smartphone, introduced in the United States just prior to the beginning of the trial but after the initial filings began.
Also on Friday, Samsung has requested a new trial, citing the aforementioned restrictive timetables and exhibit limits imposed on both Apple and Samsung. The filing states that "the Court's constraints on trial time, witnesses and exhibits were unprecedented for a patent case of this complexity and magnitude, and prevented Samsung from presenting a full and fair case in response to Apple's many claims. Samsung therefore respectfully requests that the Court grant a new trial enabling adequate time and even-handed treatment of the parties." Judge Koh had limited both parties to 25 hours and 125 exhibits early in the pre-trial filing procedure, and is seen as unlikely to overturn her own rulings on that aspect of the trial.
The case was brought by Apple after Samsung ignored warnings in 2010 from both the iPhone maker and its rival Google that Samsung's products were too derivative of Apple's designs in both trade dress and software. Apple has accused the company of "slavishly" copying from its innovations, down to the particular shade of green used in the identical "phone" icon.
Samsung's public habit of making its retail stores, promotional videos and signage resemble Apple's as closely as possible, coupled with the sharp change in designs following the iPhone and iPad's introductions, have left the public with the strong impression of the South Korean company as being prone to copying. The sentiment was picked up on and spoofed in a video produced by talk show host Conan O'Brien's staff that aired nationally in the middle of the trial and has since gone viral.
Samsung countersued Apple, claiming it had in fact infringed on two of Samsung's patents, for which it asked for $400 million in compensation. The claims from Samsung were wholly rejected, and the company was awarded nothing. Another jury trial on different patent matters -- which spawned the sales injuctions on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Galaxy Nexus smartphone between the two giants -- is likely to take place in late 2013 or 2014.
