Apple Looks to Ruin Google's Jelly Bean Party With More Lawsuits
November 7, 2012 5:38 PM
comment(s) - last by
Meanwhile Samsung aims to toss the case on grounds of juror misconduct
Apple, Inc.'s (
) legal efforts against Android haven’t stopped its sales momentum. Google Inc.'s (
) operating system today
is out-selling Apple
5-to-1 in unit sales [
Meanwhile, Apple's efforts to ban Android devices has run into a few roadblocks; for example Apple's litigation against Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility has been dismissed with prejudice
but three times
from different federal courts.
I. Apple Wants to Greatly Expand its Bans
But as they say, you only need to be in the right place at the right time, and that's precisely what happened when Apple sued Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Judge Lucy Koh
moved to dismiss the case, but in a somewhat unusual outcome a three-judge panel at the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
[PDF] Judge Koh to reconsider tossing the case. Judge Koh subsequently allowed Apple to take Samsung to trial, and in a stunning outcome the jury -- some of whose family members were Apple shareholders -- found Samsung
guilty of $1.05B USD
In the wake of that lone victory, Apple is looking to
triple the damages to $3B USD
and to ban more Google products. Hoping that lightning will strike twice, Apple filed in court this week request Judge Koh to tack on Google's latest Jelly Bean operating system, and Samsung's Galaxy Note 10.1.
While Apple's products don't have a stylus, the company still claims that the Samsung stylus-endowed designs infringe on its patents.
The Galaxy Note 10.1 is a particularly thorny pain in Apple's side. It features a friendly pen-input technology that Apple's iPad lacks. Samsung has
gained quite a bit of ground on Apple
in the tablet industry; Apple is eager to stomp out that potential rival before things get to far.
And by asking to ban Jelly Bean devices, Apple can hope to not only kill shipments of older Samsung smartphones to the U.S., but also to kill Samsung's full lineup of phones.
II. Judge Koh Strikes Down One Key Ban
It's unclear, though, whether Judge Koh will humor Apple.
Judge Koh, despite allowing the record jury verdict, recently struck down
the ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1
(the precursor to the Note 10.1), as the jury found it did not infringe on
U.S. Design Patent D504,889
, a design patent which depicted a bulkier button-less early iteration of the iPad, nicknamed by some the "fat iPad".
While Judge Koh did acknowledge that the Tab 10.1 was found to infringe on Apple user interface patents, she argued that was insufficient to ban the handsets.
That's bad news for Apple, as while the jury found Samsung's product line to be almost entirely in infringement of Apple's UI patents, they only found some handsets to be close enough to Apple's smartphone patents to be ruled in infringement. In other words if Judge Koh applies the same standard to smartphones, only a couple of older Samsung handsets, like the first-generation Galaxy S, might be banned.
Apple wants to add 17 more products to its lawsuit. [Image Source: Jason Mick/DailyTech]
Apple is making its plea to expand the case before
Judge Paul S. Grewal
, who will decide whether to send the new products for consideration by Judge Koh and the jury. Samsung is understandably upset about the additions, which it argues will add 17 stylus-based products to the existing case. (While Apple's products do not use a stylus, it argues its patents cover the absent feature as well.)
It argues it only wants to add a single product, albeit a big one --
the iPhone 5
. Victoria Maroulis, an attorney for Samsung, writes in a counter-brief to Apple's request, "By adding the stylus, Apple is going to enlarge the case significantly."
III. Jury Foreman Had Undisclosed Legal Bone to Pick With Samsung, Samsung Files for Retrial
On an interesting note Judge Koh agreed to hear arguments from Samsung that look to toss the $1B USD jury verdict on grounds of juror misconduct. The claims don't deal with the share-holding family members; that interest was clearly disclosed and ruled okay by Judge Koh.
However, one of the jurors did not reveal, when directly questioned if they had ever been involved with a lawsuit, an important case win which they were the defendant. Specifically, the juror had been sued by a hard-drive manufacturer that now controls Samsung's old hard drive business -- Seagate.
The jury foreman in the record verdict against Samsung "accidentally" forgot to mention he had been sued in the 1990s by a Samsung subsidiary. [Image Source: Walt Disney]
Basically, the juror had signed a note promising to pay Seagate, but did not, leading to a breach of contract suit. In other words, that juror, Velvin Hogan -- who also happened to play the pivotal role of jury foreman -- seemingly would have a huge bone to pick with Samsung.
In light of that undisclosed bias, Samsung's attorney's
with Judge Koh to toss the verdict and grant a retrial with a new foreman who doesn't conceal potential legal grudges against their firm.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: go away
11/9/2012 1:02:49 AM
It's a different market. It's actually good to have this kind of market for people who aren't techies and who have plenty of money. It's just it's a smaller market than the rest.
I actually don't hope Apple goes away. I just wish they'd go back to innovating and collaborating with other companies rather than litigating and de-friending the entire industry. Let them keep their closed ecosystem that appeals to some people. They just need to dump Steve Jobs' legacy of destroying anyone in his way.
RE: go away
11/10/2012 5:13:39 PM
Googles Play store is every bit as closed as the Apple app store.
People describing iOS as 'closed' really don't have any clue why that affects the customer in any negative way whatsoever.
And also, the market for premium products is always less than the majority of the common people, but it's where the highest profits can be made by offering a premium product which performs better than the rest. Much like Porsche do, for example.
As for litigation, both Samsung and Motorola have attempted to ban all of Apples products and not through retaliation. What's most amazing is that people on this site are the ones who should be able to read benchmarks and understand what is and isn't open on Android, but I see the reverse.
RE: go away
11/12/2012 3:14:03 AM
I'm not sure what relevance Google Play or the Apple app store have to my post.
iOS is a closed operating system, indeed. Again, not sure what that has to do with my post. I wasn't referring to iOS, but their ecosystem at large. It's essentially equivalent to the ecosystem gaming consoles have. Which there is also a rather sizable market for.
Great, premium products, we both know about some basic marketing and trade, that's wonderful.
In terms of litigation, I'd invite you to show me where Samsung and Motorola started their particular patent war with Apple. As far as I can tell, patent trolling has been going on for decades. Apple just happens to be one of (but not the only) main protagonist in the contemporary era. But what they've done of late, tends to buck the trend slightly from my knowledge. Whilst most companies in the past couple of decades used it to extort licencing fees, Apple are instead using the patent system in an anti-competitive way to attempt to maintain a monopoly.
And please explain to me, how the hell do you read benchmarks to better understand whether a project is open or not? Of the hundreds of open source projects I've worked with or worked on, I have no idea what benchmarks have to do with their openness. Either you are talking gibberish, or you were drunk when replying. I would hope for your sake it's the latter.
RE: go away
11/12/2012 8:07:55 AM
It's gibberish like all of his posts. He spouts bullshit to to try to deflect the conversation to try to sway it in his favor. He's nothing but a troll.
"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs
Wisconsin Judge Kicks Apple v. Google Out of Federal Court for a Third Time
November 6, 2012, 5:38 PM
Android Tablets Gain Ground, Apple Slides in Q3 2012 Market Share
November 5, 2012, 3:12 PM
Google Now Has 500 Million Android Devices in the Wild
October 11, 2012, 5:25 PM
Samsung Alleges in New Filing That Apple's iPhone 5 Infringes on Its Patents
October 2, 2012, 1:01 PM
Apple Goes for the Jugular, Asks Judge to Triple Samsung Damages to $3B
September 19, 2012, 12:24 PM
Retiree Sues Apple For $7,500 for Wiping Honeymoon Photos From His iPhone
November 30, 2015, 10:23 AM
iPhone 7 May Pack 3-4 GB Memory, More Storage; 4-Inch Comeback is Rumored
November 20, 2015, 10:12 PM
OnePlus One, OnePlus 2 Will Receive Android Marshmallow in Q1 2016
November 16, 2015, 9:58 AM
Lenovo Whoa: Motorola Droid MAXX 2 and Turbo 2 Break Cover in Leaks
October 26, 2015, 3:12 PM
Leak: Apple Preps for First Real Android App Foray With New Apple Music App
October 24, 2015, 1:59 PM
Pepsi Smartphone? Empty Calories Coming Soon to the Midrange
October 12, 2015, 11:41 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information