Apple's Beats brand in April unveiled the Powerbeats Pro, a redesigned wire-free version of its popular fitness-oriented Powerbeats earbuds.
New Damages Trial in Apple v. Samsung Set for November
Samsung and Apple will be heading back to court in November for a partial retrial, reports FOSS Patents. The trial follows judge Lucy Koh's March ruling that struck $450 million from the $1 billion in damages that were awarded to Apple last August, on the premise that the original damages may have been miscalculated by the jury.
According to Koh, the original jury may not have had a clear understanding of the patent issues, which resulted in a lump sum award that did not distinguish between patent violations, making it impossible for the court to determine which part of the damages were applicable to each patent.
Scheduled for November 12, the new trial could result in an award that favors either Apple or Samsung, depending on whether the amount is more or less than the original $450 million. The trial will be limited to the same evidence used in the original trial, which means neither Samsung nor Apple can introduce new information.
The two companies also have a separate 12-day trial scheduled in March of 2014 to investigate additional patent infringement claims.
According to Koh, the original jury may not have had a clear understanding of the patent issues, which resulted in a lump sum award that did not distinguish between patent violations, making it impossible for the court to determine which part of the damages were applicable to each patent.
Scheduled for November 12, the new trial could result in an award that favors either Apple or Samsung, depending on whether the amount is more or less than the original $450 million. The trial will be limited to the same evidence used in the original trial, which means neither Samsung nor Apple can introduce new information.
The new damages trial will take place on November 12, 13, 14, 15, and 18, 2013. Eight jurors will be selected, and for the purposes of their new damages verdict, the first jury's infringement findings will be law of the case, as the court rejected Samsung's argument that a new trial also has to re-evaluate liability issues.Though a trial will determine how much (or more) of the $450 million Samsung is required to pay, Samsung is still responsible for the remaining $600 million from the original jury decision. Apple will also request both interest and supplemental damage, which could cost Samsung even more.
Apple wants prejudgment interest and supplemental damages (damages covering the period between the jury trial and the final ruling), and it's undoubtedly entitled to both, but the court won't determine the amount (which won't be substantial compared to the overall set of issues in this case) until after the appeal from a final ruling following the second trial.Samsung requested a stay on the case in order to reexamine two Apple patents on rubber-banding and pinch-to-zoom that have since been preliminarily invalidated, but the request was denied. Koh did say, however, that a final ruling from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office could change her mind.
The two companies also have a separate 12-day trial scheduled in March of 2014 to investigate additional patent infringement claims.
[ 68 comments ]
Top Rated Comments
(View all)
82 months ago
Samsung is risking another billion. Good. Love them to get what the copycat deserves.
82 months ago
Samsung is risking another billion. Good. Love them to get what the copycat deserves.
Well, they're not, and Judge Koh has already decided that the $1 billion was excessive.
82 months ago
Hey, as long as the companies can multi-task and get out some new tech. They can sue each other until kingdom come.
82 months ago
New Damages Trial in Apple v. Samsung Set for November
1st world problems.
82 months ago
Stockholders "pay for it" by losing profits. They are not a source of income to a company.
the statements are not inconsistent.
Dude, if stockholders are not a source of income to a company, no company would ever issue them in the first place, nor would there be IPOs. Stockholders are not an ongoing source of income, granted. But to say that stockholders pay for legal costs via lost profits is begging the question of where those profits come from. To lose profits, a company must already have them. Those profits are generated through sales revenue (i.e. you and I), not stockholders.
And legal fees, like all other expenses, come out of revenue. Apple Legal does not print its own money supply.
[ Read All Comments ]
Taylor Swift revealed today on Instagram that she will be the next partner in Apple's "Music Lab" sessions, which are available in Apple retail stores.
The Music Lab session will...
Satechi today announced the Type-C Dual Multimedia Adapter, which plugs into two of the MacBook Pro's USB-C ports to offer a handful of add-on ports.
In total, this includes: one 4K HDMI...
Spotify today announced that it is extending its free-trial period for Spotify Premium to three months, up from the previous one month that users would have to try out the paid service. With this...
OtterBox today announced a new expandable wireless charging system that it calls "OtterSpot," which includes one charging base that can power up multiple batteries and a smartphone...
Apple appears to have ended U.S. online sales of its 'Designed By Apple in California' book, which chronicles 20 years of Apple product designs through 450 photographs.
A minisite...
T-Mobile appears to be experiencing a significant outage, with many T-Mobile customers unable to make calls or send text messages, reports TechCrunch.
Based on reports on Twitter and other...
Amid all the online chatter about Apple Card, you may have come across references to the "arbitration clause" in Apple's agreement, and how you should opt out of it if you intend to apply...
Over on our YouTube channel, we have an ongoing video series that's designed to highlight new, interesting, and useful iOS apps that we think are worth downloading and checking out
There are...
