Apple requests immediate damages retrial; Samsung stalls

updated 05:57 pm EDT, Tue March 19, 2013

 

Apple court filings claim retrial should be speedy, Samsung wants stay


As expected, Apple has filed a motion with Judge Lucy Koh in the Northern District of California to request a April 3 case management conference in order to expedite the ordered repeat of the damages phase of the first smartphone patent trial between Apple and Samsung. A competitive motion from Samsung was filed after Apple's, with the Korean manufacturer requesting a partial final ruling which Samsung will then appeal -- and based on that, it is requesting a stay of the damages retrial indefinitely.

Apple wrote in its filing that "until the damages retrial is held and supplemental damages are decided, appellate review of the March 1 Order will not be obtainable. No final judgment exists to ground an appeal because the March 1 Order directs further proceedings in this Court. Apple researched avenues for an interlocutory appeal of the March 1 Order, but none proved viable. The likely result of an attempt would be a dismissal of the appeal without a substantive decision. That would only further delay a conclusion to these proceedings. Thus, while interlocutory review may seem inviting, Apple believes attempting it would be futile and would only cause delay."

Apple attempted to get Samsung to agree to the expedited retrial of the damages. Apple's motion says that "attempting appellate review through that vehicle would also likely lead only to dismissal of the appeal with no substantive decision."

Patent analyst Florian Mueller believes that Judge Koh doesn't want any further delay caused by the appeals from Samsung that are likely to be dismissed. Barring the judge's approval of the Samsung delay, Mueller states that "Apple and Samsung could at least agree on a schedule for the briefing process relating to Samsung's forthcoming motion for a Rule 54(b) judgment.

Apple will file its opposition brief on March 26, and Samsung will reply to that one three days later. The parties didn't agree on a hearing date, but the stipulated briefing schedule makes Apple's requested hearing date a possibility."

The $451 million in damages slated to be retried are associated with 14 Samsung products. The products involved include the Galaxy Prevail, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Galaxy S II AT&T, Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Epic 4G, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Tab, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, and Transform. Apple is still owed $599 million as a result of the trial beyond the challenged devices, which will accumulate interest at a rate of 0.16 percent until paid in full. Additionally, supplemental damages from the period between the original verdict in August and the final judgement yet to be determined will be based on actual sales figures of the infringing devices, meaning Samsung could end up paying even more than the $1.05 billion originally awarded by the jury.

The new trial is not prejudicial against Apple or necessarily beneficial for Samsung, and is intended to clarify the nature of the infringement and which patents are held in violation for a more granular determination of what is owed. Damages for the infringement, however, could be higher or lower, and will be determined by a new jury.


13-03-01 Apple v Samsung Final Order on Damages


By Electronista Staff

toggle

Comments

  1. Bobfozz

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 07-28-08

    Miracle Time

    your comment

  1. Flying Meat

    Junior Member

    Joined: 01-25-07

    Yeah, yeah...

    The excruciatingly slow machinations of pretrial, trial, judgement, appeal, judgement, hearings, motions this way, motions that way, awarded delays, appeals,...

    Eventually no one will care any more. There won't be competing products, just the same product with different company names. Keep going Samsung. You're not doing anyone any good with this. Pay up and move on.

Login Here

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

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

Sponsor

Recent Reviews

MaxUpgrades MaxConnect for 2006-2008 Mac Pro

Nobody outside of Cupertino's privileged bunch knows the future of the Mac Pro line for sure. Despite Apple's reluctance to tell us wh ...

Brother HL-3170CDW LED Printer

We've mentioned before that we are far from a paperless society. For now, at least, there are tasks that require a piece of paper for ...

HTC One

It is hard to overstate just how critically important the HTC One is to the Taiwanese company’s fortunes. Despite its alarming decline ...

Sponsor

 
toggle

Popular News