Apparently there will not be a jury trial between Apple and Motorola in Chicago.
Judge Richard Posner (a highly respected Circuit Court judge who has been called "the most cited legal scholar of the 20th century") has:
"tentatively decided that the case should be dismissed with prejudice because neither party can establish a right to relief."
Basically he doesn't think that either Apple or Motorola can prove the need for damages. (The case had been trimmed down to four Apple patents and one Motorola patent, if I recall correctly.)
Throughout the hearings, Judge Posner has scolded Apple for trying to turn the trial into a popularity contest, and for filing a blizzard of motions. He was also not impressed by Apple's claims that its patents on things like vertical scroll lock were responsible for sales. A January partial transcript included this comment from him:
"I'm not going to have competing experts talking about their marketing surveys. I regard that evidence as totally worthless. I want to see sales, I want to see evidence that Apple would have sold less or did sell less when all of a sudden Motorola started offering [scroll lock] -- I mean, maybe Motorola advertised and they said, "Wow, we're worried about your finger is not swiping a hundred percent vertical. Doesn't matter. We've cured that." THAT would certainly be probative evidence."
Judge Posner will still look at an Apple request for an injunction, but its chances appear slim since he seems to think an injunction would be disproportionate to any violation, and not serve the public interest.
USAToday link, PC World link
Judge Richard Posner (a highly respected Circuit Court judge who has been called "the most cited legal scholar of the 20th century") has:
"tentatively decided that the case should be dismissed with prejudice because neither party can establish a right to relief."
Basically he doesn't think that either Apple or Motorola can prove the need for damages. (The case had been trimmed down to four Apple patents and one Motorola patent, if I recall correctly.)
Throughout the hearings, Judge Posner has scolded Apple for trying to turn the trial into a popularity contest, and for filing a blizzard of motions. He was also not impressed by Apple's claims that its patents on things like vertical scroll lock were responsible for sales. A January partial transcript included this comment from him:
"I'm not going to have competing experts talking about their marketing surveys. I regard that evidence as totally worthless. I want to see sales, I want to see evidence that Apple would have sold less or did sell less when all of a sudden Motorola started offering [scroll lock] -- I mean, maybe Motorola advertised and they said, "Wow, we're worried about your finger is not swiping a hundred percent vertical. Doesn't matter. We've cured that." THAT would certainly be probative evidence."
Judge Posner will still look at an Apple request for an injunction, but its chances appear slim since he seems to think an injunction would be disproportionate to any violation, and not serve the public interest.
USAToday link, PC World link
Last edited: