One step forward, two steps back: ITC rules that Samsung infringes four new Apple patents

We’ve had plenty of twists and turns in the Apple vs Samsung patent war over the last few months, but things have gotten crazier than ever these past couple of weeks. Sammy seemed capable to rise from its ashes despite a long string of painful defeats, but just when we were ready to celebrate a couple of meaningful wins for our Android kings, Apple hit back.
And what a hit it is! Definitely not as massive as the one from California in August, but much more important than Samsung’s minor wins of late.
The US International Trade Commission (ITC) has made a preliminary ruling regarding new Apple accusations of infringement on four patents, finding Samsung once again guilty of copying Cupertino “innovation”.
The four patents relate to both design and software, but have nothing to do with those that have been the subject of the California trial currently in appeal. That means Samsung is in a new sea of trouble, though the ITC’s ruling is only preliminary, being given out by Judge Thomas Pender until it can be reviewed by the full commission.
Even if the commission’s decision will also be in favor of Apple (and it could well be), it’s not all doom and gloom for Samsung, as the case will then pass through the usual law hoops, including several appeals before the accusations can be taken in front of a jury.
What should be Sammy’s immediate concern is a possible Apple motion for import bans, which might well follow this preliminary ruling. That could hurt Samsung badly, although we don’t know yet exactly what phones are accused of infringement of these patents.
It could have been even worse for the Korean-based company, as Apple’s original complaint, filed in July 2011, brought accusations regarding five utility and two design patents. One patent was withdrawn soon after, while Judge Pender’s ruling found no violation of another two.
The four remaining ones describe “an ornamental design of an electronic device” (U.S. Design Patent D618,678), “a touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics” (7,479,949), “a method and apparatus for providing translucent images on a computer display” (RE41,922), and “an audio I/O headset plug and plug detection circuitry” (7,912,501).
As usual, Samsung quickly issued a formal statement through the voice of Adam Yates, Director of North America Corporate Communications, which said that “There is no legal basis for the motion for injunction by Apple. We will continue to serve our customers and sales of Samsung products will proceed as usual. Samsung will continue to actively defend and protect our intellectual property to ensure our continued innovation and growth in the mobile communications business.”
Meanwhile, Apple declined to comment on the ruling, although we’re guessing celebratory dances are going on in Cupertino as we speak. Still, this is only one, albeit pretty important, won battle for Apple, with the war being wide-open for new surprises. Samsung’s got something cooking too, so everything’s to play for.
Do you agree? Is this another normal day for the Apple vs Samsung brawl? Or could it be the final nail in Sammy’s coffin?

 

Read More

Samsung denies that they’ve cut ties with Apple, says the Korea Times story is false

We published an article yesterday that said Samsung was going to stop selling displays to Apple. The story was first reported by The Korean Times, who we consider to be a highly reliable source of information. Apparently they messed up, which means we messed up, so we want to apologize. Samsung reached out to C|Net to say that the article in the KT was 100% false. They even went so far as to say that they “never tried to cut the supply” to Apple.
So does this mean Apple and Samsung are in a healthy relationship? Absolutely not. Rumor has it that Apple is going to stop securing chips from Samsung and instead ask TSMC to manufacture their next generation parts. That’s not too surprising because Samsung also makes their own chips under the “Exynos” brand. We can’t imagine Apple being all too thrilled with giving the blueprints to their custom designed processors to Samsung.
Back to the KT story, we’re actually pretty disappointed that it turned out to be false because we were hoping that Samsung would start using their advanced LCD panels in their smartphones. Take the iPhone 5 for instance. It has a display that pushes 326 pixels per inch. Keeping the PPI constant, that would mean Samsung could make a 720p display that measures just 4.5 inches across, something that’s much more manageable than the 4.8 inch Galaxy S III.
We’re less than three months away from 2013, a year where we expect to see the term “flagship smartphone” get redefined yet again. If the HTC Butterfly is any indication of what we can expect to see, 1080p screens powered by quad core Qualcomm processors and 2 GB of RAM are going to become the norm. Can Samsung make a 1080p mobile phone display? We have our doubts they can scale OLED to such insane densities.

SOURCES C|Net

 

Read More

Apple files response to Samsung’s complaint of juror misconduct

Last month we reported that Samsung was claiming that due to misconduct on the part of the jury foreman in the Apple vs Samsung case, the case should be thrown out. Apple has filed its official response with the court, claiming that if Samsung had an issue with the jury, they should have brought it up before the hearing began.

Possible Bias

After Apple won a patent dispute against Samsung, leaving Samsung to pay just over $1 billion to Apple, Samsung claimed that jury foreman Velvin Hogan was biased against Samsung for a number of reasons.  First, Hogan didn’t mention a 1993 bankruptcy filing. Second, Hogan failed to disclose the fact that he was sued by Seagate, his former employer.
That doesn’t sound like much, except that Samsung is Seagate’s largest single shareholder. It also turns out that Hogan’s bankruptcy came as a direct result of the Seagate suit. Additionally, while Hogan’s prior experience with patents was part of why he was selected for the jury, his opinions on patents could have lead him to a biased viewpoint. Hogan said that the court only requires potential jurors to mention litigation within the past 10 years, so he wasn’t required to disclose any of the matters mentioned.

Why Apple Says it Doesn’t Matter

The above claims from Samsung may all be legitimate, but that isn’t what Apple is arguing. Apple’s response is mainly that if Samsung had wanted to investigate Hogan for possible bias, the time to do that was before the trial had started. Apple is saying that Samsung’s right to investigate such issues was waived because it is possible or even likely that Samsung was aware of Hogan’s past, but declined to investigate further until after it had lost the case.
Ultimately, the decision of whether Samsung’s claims are acted upon or not rests with Judge Lucy Koh. No matter what is decided, it is likely that this is all going to get more complicated before it is resolved.
Do you think that Hogan was indeed biased against Samsung? Could this just be a last ditch attempt to get the case thrown out of court?

 

Read More