USPTO Invalidates One of Apple's iPhone Design Patents in Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Aug 17, 2015.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]

    FOSS Patents reported tonight that the Central Reexamination Division of the United States Patent and Trademark Office has reexamined one of the key iPhone design patents in the Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit. The validity of one of the patents (618,677) has received a non-final rejection:
    Apple was originally awarded over $1 billion from the original lawsuit, but that amount has been reduced substantially to about $548 million in damages. Aside from this particular design patent, Apple still has other claims that have not been reduced or invalidated from the previous decision.

    Samsung was most recently denied their latest appeal attempt, leaving them with the only option of turning to the U.S. Supreme Court. It appears this invalidation has no direct impact on the current standing of the lawsuit, but may help Samsung in their appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Article Link: USPTO Invalidates One of Apple's iPhone Design Patents in Apple vs. Samsung Lawsuit
     
  2. The Barron macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    #2
    Sammy is going down! The stock is having a very difficult time these days. Go iPhone 6s!
     
  3. AngerDanger macrumors 68040

    AngerDanger

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    #3
    The dashed lines of the article's image encourage small children to cut out the device and commit potential patent infringements of their very own! :)
     
  4. nepalisherpa macrumors 68020

    nepalisherpa

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    Location:
    USA
  5. Analog Kid macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #5
    It's interesting to see what happens when the titans clash over IP. It's so incredibly expensive to litigate patent cases that it's rare to see a court pay this level of attention to anything... Usually it's a dice roll, and most companies prefer to settle or cross license rather than gamble.

    I can't begin to imagine the the cost of these suits even before accounting for fines and other rulings...
     
  6. blacktape242 macrumors 65816

    blacktape242

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
  7. Wreckus macrumors 6502a

    Wreckus

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2015
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    #8
    Why do I have this feeling Samsung corrupted the
    Call me crazy but I agree with you.
     
  8. Aluminum213 macrumors 68040

    Aluminum213

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
  9. Sevanw Suspended

    Sevanw

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2014
    #10
    Boom goes the dynamite. And just like that is all over.
     
  10. lazard macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #11
    so in the end Apple will have spent tens of millions of dollars in legal fees to collect a couple dollars in from Samsung because this pretty much wipes out the remaining award.
     
  11. peterdevries macrumors 68040

    peterdevries

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Location:
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    #12
    I hope this is the famous "rounded corners" patent, because that would finally put many discussions about the ridiculousness of that patent to rest.
     
  12. Yojimbo007 macrumors 6502a

    Yojimbo007

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    #13
    The whole freaking system is brocken.....
    Why did they even issue the patent to start with?
    Any idiot can see that samdung copied iphones design.. All one has to do is look at samdung phones before iPhone and after..
    All this hair splitting is only making the lawyers involved richer while at the same time destroying confidence in the system..
    Good luck US of A...for paving the path for Anarchy ...
    DOJ and now USPTO ... ...and shenanigans ...
    It a shame !
     
  13. Analog Kid, Aug 17, 2015
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2015

    Analog Kid macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #14
    Ok, so I don't have much background in design patents, in particular I'm having a hard time understanding what exactly is being claimed with all the dashed, and dot-dashed lines and monochromatic grading. Anybody done a design patent?

    From what I can tell, I think this is what's going on:

    If I understand the discussion of what the broken lines mean, Apple filed a design patent for the original iPhone that covered speaker slot at the top, the home button at the bottom, the display rectangle and the plastic plate on the back.

    And is the other early patent for the same phone, or a design that Apple didn't pursue? It seems to not be claiming the home button, and doesn't seem to claim the backing at all.

    The claim in question looks like the 3G or 3Gs. It appears to be claiming the entire front surface of the phone.


    The problem apparently is that Apple tried to file the latest claim in 2008, but claim that it was valid since 2007 because it is mostly the same as the earlier claims. For that to work they can't disclose anything new in the newer claim, they can only attempt to patent more of what they talked about but didn't claim in the earlier one.

    Edit: I found the full ruling, it's linked at the bottom of the article (and my post below).
     
  14. Analog Kid macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #15
    Maybe that's it? The rounded corners aren't sufficiently emphasized in the earlier filings?

    It seems they're disclosed, however. Just not claimed until the D6'77, which would be the point... I still think it's the one piece face.
     
  15. lazard macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #16
    Patent D677 was basically a patent for a device with a rectangular front face with a rectangular screen, a border around the screen, and an oblong-shaped speaker opening above the screen.
     
  16. ThisIsNotMe Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    #17
    Why?
     
  17. Analog Kid macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #18
    Oh, the full ruling was linked at the bottom of the article...

    The reason the earlier priority date doesn't hold is because the 2008 patent shows the front as one large black rectangle, and the others do not. USPTO also claims the home button is not part of the claim because it's surrounded by a dashed line. In earlier filings, Apple indicated that some lines were just for reference (to show internal boundaries) but they didn't make that explicit in this one.

    The ruling does a good job of showing the bits and pieces they keyed in on to rule-- it's interesting to see what they think it obvious and what they don't think is obvious. I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that filling the space with the display is obvious, particularly given that there are controls around the home button of the LG patent when the device is turned on.

    It might be technically obvious, but from a design perspective it feels different... Out of my field though.

    Anyway, this all reinforces my opinion that there's not bright lines between designs or inventions, it's just starting positions for an epic legal arm wrestling match.
     
  18. vertsix macrumors 65816

    vertsix

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    #19
    I don't understand why they both don't get along at this point?

    Everyone copies from each other at some point. It's really not that relevant anymore.
     
  19. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #20
    I could see how a desperate Samsung would turn to South Korean government to put pressure on the US Supreme Court and to also buy off US Senators to lobby on behalf of Samsung legal battles in US courts. After all…. much of SK politicians have been bought out by the chaebol/cartels long ago. And to be fair, I'm also implying that US politicians are equally corrupt, and can be bought out, which is exactly why it's possible for Samsung to "buy" legal favors from the US politicians and courts.
     
  20. peterdevries macrumors 68040

    peterdevries

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Location:
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    #21
    Do you have proof for any of this? Because without any proof your assertions aren't any better than those of that astronaut that claimed aliens came to us to stop us from using nuclear weapons.
     
  21. Rafterman macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    #22
    Why are you excited about Samsung "going down"? The only thing motivating Apple to innovate on the iPhone is Samsung's competition. Not to mention that Samsung makes many of the iPhone's parts.
     
  22. Rafterman macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    #23
    Gotta love people who think, when something doesn't go the way they think it should, its obviously a conspiracy.
     
  23. JPSaltzman macrumors regular

    JPSaltzman

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
  24. Analog Kid macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #25
    We can't get through 2 pages of posts on an Apple/Samsung thread without war erupting among their customers-- management just letting bygones be bygones seems a bit utopian...
     

Share This Page