Apple vs. Samsung Trial Day 12 Preview: Jury Instructions and Closing Arguments Start

By

Apple-v-Samsung-collage1

The jury will hear instructions to find a verdict for multiple counts of patent infringement claims in today’s court session of the Apple-Samsung trial.  After terms are set, lawyers from each side will gather their final arguments and present them to the jury with the hope of resolving the first skirmish in a series of big legal battles between them.

Only this skirmish is more significant that most. It could end up inflicting very serious financial blows if either one receives a large reward figure or patent nullification. According to financial analysts who testified at the trial last week, a full finding against could cost Samsung upwards of $2.5B and Apple more than $500M. These figures are based on combinations of profit-loss estimates of products sold. The jury can consider and amend these figures as needed. The jury may, for example, choose to give Apple a reward based on the average high-end price point of iPhone applications, at $1.49 an app, as opposed to the median app price of $.99.

But that’s just one possibility. Apple could suffer blows to its lucrative and proprietary touch-screen and mobile technology that has helped push the company towards its current status as the most valuable company in the world.

.

‘It’s Time For Peace’ – Judge Urges Apple, Samsung To Talk One Last Time Before Jury Deliberations

By

You weren't expecting Apple to issue a straight and sincere apology, were you?
You weren't expecting Apple to issue a straight and sincere apology, were you?

At the end of a long trial day, US District Court Judge Lucy Koh, who’s been the presiding justice over the course of both pre-trial and actual trial, urged that Apple and Samsung speak together to try and resolve their differences out of court before the jury comes back to deliberate on the evidence that has been presented by both sides this week and last.

“It’s time for peace,” Koh said, adding, “I see risks here for both sides.”

.

Apple Files For Sanctions Against Samsung After Documents Released To Media

By

applevssamsung

Remember the excluded Samsung documents we told you about yesterday? The ones that Samsung sent out to the media after they had been denied the ability to enter them into court? We told you how Samsung’s lawyer, John B. Quinn, argued that sending them along to journalists was neither unethical nor illegal. Apple has a different opinion, which they filed in court today.

.

Apple Continues To Argue That Samsung Copied The iPhone, Samsung Calls It American-Style Competition

By

Apple and Samsung still can't see eye to eye.
Apple and Samsung still can't see eye to eye.

Today, Apple and Samsung both presented their opening arguments in front of US District Court Judge Lucy Koh in the second day of the legal case originally brought by Apple against Samsung for patent infringement. Samsung countersued, claiming its own patents were infringed upon. Apple Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al, No. 11-1846 began yesterday with jury selection, and opening statements were made today, along with some expert testimony by Apple designer Christopher Stringer.

Not surprisingly, Apple believes that Samsung has copied the iPhone wholesale. Korea-based Samsung continues to repeat that it has not copied anything, but rather a simple matter of American-style competition.

Lawyers for both sides squared off today in court with their opening arguments.

.

Ten Jurors Selected In Apple v. Samsung Patent Trial

By

Judge Birss thinks the Galaxy Tab just isn't as cool. We agree.
And here we go.

An interesting jury has been selected today in the high-profile patent case between Apple and Samsung. Of course, any details about said jury would be interesting simply due to their inclusion in such a pivotal legal case, but the list does sound like somewhat of a lead in to a stand-up comedy routine. An insurance agent, an unemployed video game enthusiast, and a project manager for AT&T are three of the ten jurors selected today to decide the issues behind the patent case between the two electronics superstar companies.

.

Judge Denies Two More Samsung Pre-Trial Proposals, Uses Apple Patent Wording As A Definition

By

post-180070-image-577475c5c8f3e3205ddec4d511e9e332-jpg

A mere ten days before the scheduled patent infringement trial between Samsung and Apple, US District Judge Lucky Koh rejected two more proposals from Samsung, maker of Android enabled smartphones. Judge Koh entered a supplemental claim construction order in which two disputed terms are now defined. Unfortunately for Samsung, who initially requested the order, the definition decision favors Apple, using the Cupertino-based tech company’s definition in the dispute.

.

Judge Koh Rejects Bid For Secrecy In Apple Samsung Patent Case

By

Could this be a result of patent infringement?
Too many secrets?

US District Court Judge Lucy Koh rejected requests today from both Apple and Samsung regarding the parties’ proposal to keep portions of key legal documents out of the public eye during their upcoming patent case in California this month.

If you’ve been following all the current pre-trial back and forth between Apple and Samsung in the Apple Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al, 11-1846 case, in which Apple has claimed Samsung is infringing on several patents, Samsung has counterclaimed similar infringement arguments, and Apple’s request for a temporary sales ban on the Samsung Nexus Phone has been accepted and enforced by the court.

You’ll also know that Judge Koh has been steadily, one might say doggedly, dealing with both parties, trying to keep the case as relevant, simple, and direct as possible.

.

Apple In A Strong Legal Position, Samsung Continues Defensive Tactics

By

We do not agree. Neither do we.
Less is, apparently, more.

In the continuing saga of Apple and Samsung in the copyright infringement trial in California recently, it seems as if Apple has a much stronger position than many people might believe. This isn’t a case of Apple stifling innovation, but rather of Samsung knowing very well that it has a weak case in both the claims it is defending against as well as the claims it has brought to court itself.

.