<em>Apple v. Samsung</em> Judge: 'It's Time for Global Peace'



SAN JOSE, California — Everybody settle down. Sorting out the Samsung v. Apple verdict is gonna take awhile, even if the judge presiding over the trial might trim the $1.05 billion award and said it’s time for the tech giants to make peace.


The epic Apple v. Samsung patent-infringement case was back in San Jose Federal Court on Thursday, and federal judge Lucy Koh said she’s too busy with another patent trial to issue a sweeping ruling on the sales bans Apple is seeking and the question of whether Samsung should pay more, or less, than the $1.05 billion in damages a jury awarded in August. Instead, she’ll issue a series of rulings in the next few months and wrap this up.


“I think it’s time for global peace,” the judge said from the bench. “I think it’d be good for consumers, the industry, and the parties.”


It was the first time the two sides have been in court since a nine-member jury on Aug. 24 awarded Apple a $1.05 billion award after ruling that Samsung violated Apple product design and essential user interface elements. The hearing was largely procedural, with lawyers ponderously quibbling over intricacies. At one point, Koh called a particular point moot, prompting an Apple lawyer to reply, “It’s different shades of moot.”


At issue are three points: whether the damages were appropriate; whether as many as 26 Samsung products should be banned from sale in the U.S.; and whether the jury decision should be thrown out altogether because of alleged misconduct from the jury foreman, who failed to disclose his involvement in a lawsuit. Although only three of the products at issue in the case are still on the market, a sweeping ban would substantially hurt the Korean company financially, make an example of the Android handset maker, and could affect the types of products retailers are willing to put on their store shelves.


In a nutshell, Apple wants to tack another $500 million onto the verdict and additional Samsung products added to the injunction. “Hopefully after an injunction they will be deterred from getting this close to the line and we will not be back in front of you in the future,” Apple attorney Michael Jacobs told Judge Koh.


Samsung, of course, wants the verdict dissected after a few anomalous calculations were examined, including a seemingly exorbitant charge of $58 million on the Samsung Galaxy Prevail smartphone. “You should reverse-engineer (the damages), make sure jury verdict is causally related to the evidence based on legal theory,” Samsung lawyer Kathleen Sullivan said. “We’ve given you two legal errors that you can correct with mathematical certainty.”


Koh indicated that she might trim the award granted in the Prevail, noting the figure was “way beyond reasonable royalty or lost profit.”


Samsung feels Apple is actively engaging in a smear campaign and reiterated its point that the jury foreman in the trial had incentive to be vindictive against Samsung. Even so, Samsung counsel Charles Verhoeven said the company is willing to talk. “The ball’s in [Apple's] court,” he said. Koh was surely happy to hear that, as she appears exasperated by the growing length and complexity of the case.


“When is this case going to resolve?” she asked at one point. “This is not a joke, I’m being serious.”


It may not end even when Koh signs off on it. The case is expected to be appealed to the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.



You're reading an article about
<em>Apple v. Samsung</em> Judge: 'It's Time for Global Peace'
This article
<em>Apple v. Samsung</em> Judge: 'It's Time for Global Peace'
can be opened in url
http://variationsnews.blogspot.com/2012/12/v-samsung-judge-time-for-global-peace.html
<em>Apple v. Samsung</em> Judge: 'It's Time for Global Peace'