The court docket dominated that Samsung didn’t copied Apple deliberately

samsung apple verdict 1024x874 The court docket dominated that Samsung didnt copied Apple deliberately

The jury in U.S. lawsuit between Apple and Samsung came last August to the conclusion that Samsung has violated several patents from Apple . However, the judge in the case that the position of judges now partially put aside. Judge Lucy Koh believes that Samsung is not intentionally violate Apple’s patents. That probably means that no additional penalties Samsung gets on top of the $ 1 billion that the jury upheld. However, the court rejected a request by Samsung for a new trial off.

It is in the present case to seven patents from Apple, which the jury found that Samsung in five cases offending.

Samsung delivered a fine of $ 1.049 billion U.S. dollars, an amount that by this judgment simply has to be paid. But Koh thinks Apple to finally determine whether Samsung intentionally acted, also must be able to demonstrate that there is an objectively determinable, high likelihood that the actions of Samsung contributed to the infringement of a valid patent.Samsung’s position was that Apple’s patents were invalid. So even though they violate the patents, that would not be done intentionally.

The pronunciation of tonight makes it clear that no new trial will come. Judge Koh believes that the current trial is conducted fairly and that the awarded penalty of $ 1 billion has been substantiated with evidence.That seems a bit contradictory statement, like the fact that Samsung is pushing for a new trial, but whose exact details of its decision would, the 40-story document edges of Koh read below. Koh ends with the conclusion:

Reasons for aforementioned, the Court GRANTS Samsung’s motion for judgment as a matter of law That claims 15 and 16 of the ’516 patent are not exhausted. The Court grants judgment as a matter Also of law That Samsung’s acts were not willful or Patent Infringement. However, for the Reasons Discussed below, the Court DENIES Samsung’s motion for judgment as a matter of law in all other respects, and DENIES Samsung’s motion for a new trial.

More info: Apple vs Samsung Pronunciation by Lucy Koh (PDF)

Follow us on Twitter, subscribe to our Facebook Page, find us on LinkedIn, circle us on Google+