Sam­sung to re­view on Ap­ple patent dam­ages


Sam­sung Elec­tron­ics Co. said it will seek a fur­ther re­view of patent dam­ages awarded to Ap­ple Inc. (AAPL) even af­ter win­ning a re­duc­tion of about 45 per­cent of the $1.05 bil­lion amount.

US District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, Cal­i­for­nia, on March 1 cut the dam­ages award af­ter find­ing that the jury based its de­ci­sion on an in­cor­rect le­gal the­ory. Vis­i­tors clus­ter around dis­plays of mo­bile de­vices at the Sam­sung Elec­tron­ics Co. pavil­ion at the Mo­bile World Congress in Barcelona. Pho­tog­ra­pher: Daw­son/Bloomberg

"We are pleased that the court de­cided to strike $450,514,650 from the jury's award," Nam Ki Yung, a spokesman at Su­won, South Korea-based Sam­sung, said in an e-mailed state­ment to­day. "Sam­sung in­tends to seek fur­ther re­view as to the re­main­ing award."

Sam­sung and Ap­ple have each scored vic­to­ries in patent dis­putes fought over four con­ti­nents since the iPad maker ac­cused Asia's big­gest elec­tron­ics pro­ducer in April 2011 of " slav­ishly copy­ing" its de­vices. The com­pa­nies con-

Simon tinue to bat­tle over patents as they seek dom­i­nance of a mo­bile-de­vice mar­ket es­ti­mated by re­searcher Yan­kee Group at $346 bil­lion in 2012, even as Ap­ple re­mains one of Sam­sung's big­gest cus­tomers.

Koh, who pre­vi­ously re­jected Cu­per­tino, Cal­i­for­nia-based Ap­ple's bid to ban U. S. sales of 26 Sam­sung de­vices, also de­nied the iPhone maker's re­quest to in­crease the jury's award. The judge said the amount owed by the Galaxy maker was heav­ily dis­puted, and the jury wasn't bound to ac­cept ei­ther side's dam­ages es­ti­mate. The jury's award for 14 other prod­ucts stands at $598.9 mil­lion, she said.

Steve Dowl­ing, a spokesman for Ap­ple, had said the com­pany had no com­ment on the rul­ing. Koh or­dered a new trial on dam­ages for some Sam­sung prod­ucts. The com­pa­nies should con­sider ap­peal­ing her rul­ing be­fore the trial be­gins, the judge said.

A wit­ness for Ap­ple whose tes­ti­mony the jury re­lied on "pre­sented a the­ory that the court had ruled legally im­per­mis­si­ble," Koh said in her rul­ing.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Pakistan

© PressReader. All rights reserved.