Apple vs. Samsung Case to Return to Lower Court for Possible Damages Retrial

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
50,014
11,292



The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today ruled that a lower district court must decide whether a damages retrial is required in the long running legal battle between Apple and Samsung, reports CNET.

The case will return to the same San Jose, California court where it was originally heard by Judge Lucy Koh. From today's ruling:
Both parties filed statements urging us to take different actions. While Apple requests continued panel review, Samsung requests that we remand to the district court for a new trial on damages. For the reasons explained below, we adopt neither suggested course of action. Instead, we remand this case to the district court for further proceedings, which may or may not include a new damages trial.
Apple's dispute with Samsung dates back to 2011, when Apple sued Samsung for copying the iPhone's design. Apple was initially awarded nearly $1 billion in damages, but a significant part of that decision was reversed in 2015, leaving Samsung owing $548 million.

Samsung paid the $548 million in 2015, but also asked the Supreme Court to hear the case in the hopes of reimbursement, claiming it was asked to pay a "disproportionate" sum for violating Apple's design patents. $399 million of the $548 million was awarded for the design patent violation, and in December, the Supreme Court sided with Samsung, overturning that particular damages ruling.

The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals to reconsider the $399 million portion of the ruling, and the lawsuit was officially reopened in January of 2017. The U.S. Court of Appeals was charged with redetermining the amount Samsung owes Apple for infringing on the design patents, a task that will now fall to the district court because the appeals court says the district court is better suited to make such a decision.

The original damages award was calculated based on the profit Samsung earned from the sale of infringing galaxy devices, but Samsung has claimed the amount should not have been based on the total profits of each device, but rather the individual components that violated the patents, which the Supreme Court agreed with.

The District Court for the Northern District of California will now consider arguments from both Apple and Samsung and determine what additional proceedings, if any, are necessary in the case.

Article Link: Apple vs. Samsung Case to Return to Lower Court for Possible Damages Retrial
 
  • Like
Reactions: macfacts

1050792

macrumors Demi-God
Oct 2, 2016
2,515
3,989
Apple looks like that kid on the school who keeps crying because some other kid stole his candy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaymie1983

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,534
25,266
The "stolen candy" was one chocolate chip piece. Hardly justifies a lawsuit asking for millions of dollars.
Must have been a pretty big chocolate chip piece! The lawsuit was quite thorough. And that 132 page internal Samsung document confirmed what most people already suspected.

It's a little easier now to look back and gloss over the iPhone's influence. Smartphones today are ubiquitous. But Samsung copied as much as they could. Not just icons and UI, but packaging and all the rest.

It's not to say Apple haven't ever stolen anything. However it is blatantly obvious that Samsung copied as much as they could in this instance. I'm sure people can admit that, even if they have personal reservations about Apple. :)
 

1050792

macrumors Demi-God
Oct 2, 2016
2,515
3,989
Must have been a pretty big chocolate chip piece! The lawsuit was quite thorough. And that 132 page internal Samsung document confirmed what most people already suspected.

It's a little easier now to look back and gloss over the iPhone's influence. Smartphones today are ubiquitous. But Samsung copied as much as they could. Not just icons and UI, but packaging and all the rest.

It's not to say Apple haven't ever stolen anything. However it is blatantly obvious that Samsung copied as much as they could in this instance. I'm sure people can admit that, even if they have personal reservations about Apple. :)
"Good Artists copy Great Artists steal" - Steve Jobs. In this case it seems that the stealer/copier did a better job.
 

69Mustang

macrumors 604
Jan 7, 2014
7,537
14,284
In between a rock and a hard place
Must have been a pretty big chocolate chip piece! The lawsuit was quite thorough. And that 132 page internal Samsung document confirmed what most people already suspected.

It's a little easier now to look back and gloss over the iPhone's influence. Smartphones today are ubiquitous. But Samsung copied as much as they could. Not just icons and UI, but packaging and all the rest.

It's not to say Apple haven't ever stolen anything. However it is blatantly obvious that Samsung copied as much as they could in this instance. I'm sure people can admit that, even if they have personal reservations about Apple. :)
As much as I love a good analogy, this thread topic will probably be better served if we avoid sweetening it up chocolate influences. :D

Just a guess, but I think that judgement will be sliced in half and Samsung will end up paying about $200 million. Considering most of those patents have been shot down the world over, it's likely that will continue here. The good thing is a lowered judgment benefits Apple as much as, if not more, it benefits Samsung. It would set a precedent that patent trolls can't ask for out-sized judgments from Apple for a simple component claim.
[doublepost=1486513850][/doublepost]
Pay up, Samsung.
Already paid in 2015. Looking for a refund.
 

tooltalk

macrumors 6502
Jan 15, 2015
387
326
NY, NY
wonder if Lucy Koh is going to preside over the damage only trial again. Judge Koh has been on the news quite a bit for a possible appellate court appointment last year. Based on what I've seen through the Apple and Samsung trials, she's anything, but impartial -- and her potential appointment to the appellate court seems to explain her behavior.
 
Last edited:

Sefstah

macrumors 6502a
Dec 21, 2015
589
1,066
Apple owes me and all of its users money, for not innovating anymore, and forcing dongles on us.
 

xDKP

macrumors 68000
Feb 27, 2011
1,509
1,126
Denmark
Apple looks like that kid on the school who keeps crying because some other kid stole his candy.
To me this is a way more comical look at the US Justice systems.. What is going on here? I know I don't have all the details but it seems like they ruled a verdict way back and keep undermining their own verdict and ruling?
 

xDKP

macrumors 68000
Feb 27, 2011
1,509
1,126
Denmark
It's about democracy in action, the right to appeal rulings one feels are unjust, to a higher court.
I agree and we have the same system in Denmark, but this feels like it's been appealed like 6-7 times now?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.