Apple wins reversal of $625.5 million Mirror Worlds verdict

“Apple Inc. won a court ruling that throws out a $625.5 million patent-infringement verdict over how documents are displayed on a computer screen,” Susan Decker and Dennis Robertson report for Bloomberg.

“A federal judge in Tyler, Texas, today said Apple didn’t infringe a patent owned by Mirror Worlds LLC and closed the case in Apple’s favor. The court also said the damage award was too high,” Decker and Robertson report. “The judge did uphold the validity of the three Mirror Worlds patents.”

“‘Mirror Worlds may have painted an appealing picture for the jury, but it failed to lay a solid foundation sufficient to support important elements it was required to establish under the law,’ U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis wrote,” Decker and Robertson report. “The trial focused on the Spotlight, Time Machine and Cover Flow features in Apple’s Mac operating systems. The jury on Oct. 1 said Apple was infringing three patents and awarded damages of $208.5 million for each patent. Apple had argued in court papers that the amount was too high and that it was improper to add the damages. Davis agreed, saying ‘the evidentiary record is insufficient to support the jury’s damage awards’ even if the infringement finding had been upheld.”

Read more in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Lynn W.,” “Manny S., and “James W.” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
Apple wins patents for Cover Flow, Time Machine and Magic Mouse – October 5, 2010
Apple challenges $625.5 million jury verdict in Mirror Worlds patent infringement trial – October 4, 2010
Apple ordered to pay up to $625.5 million in damages to Mirror Worlds – October 4, 2010
Apple loses patent-infringement trial over Cover Flow, Time Machine – October 3, 2010
Mirror Worlds slaps Apple with patent infringement lawsuit over Time Machine – March 18, 2008


    1. Incorrect. Please reread the article, both here and at the source:

      ““A federal judge in Tyler, Texas, today said Apple didn’t infringe a patent owned by Mirror Worlds LLC and closed the case in Apple’s favor.”

      Case closed.

  1. Apple loses hundreds of million by infringing on someone’s IP, and no snide MDN take. Of course if it were the other way around we would hear from all on this board what low lifes the infringing party is. Hypocrite blind followers.

    1. Dude you’re obviously new around here. Haven’t you noticed in the last few months, a tsunami of Apple news? If MDN took time to read and form an opinion for every story MDNews Readers brought in for vetting, life would get boring around here real quick.

      Personally, I think many of MDN’s comments consistently smack of cheerleading but I can’t find fault with that, you see, we had a really long dry spell that lasted almost a decade. Those who feel vindicated by Apple and AAPL, myself included, after suffering the slings and arrows of the never ending parade of trolls during the Windows Wars, tend to relish MDNs input, especially when they’re on their game.

      Not enough iCal shit for me though.

  2. While I agree with the outcome..I think it’s interesting that a judge can nix the jury’s decision. What’s the point of a jury? To prevent a bias judge from making a bad decision? Seems like they can do that anyway…but in this case, it was a judge that compensated for a bum jury…again, interesting.

    1. I don’t know about America but, where I come from, a jury is a trier of fact, whereas it’s a judge’s job to rule on points of law. Many man-in-the-street critics believe, wrongly, that you can have a second bite at the cherry if you don’t like a jury’s decision.

      In fact, if a jury rules against you, the only course open is to argue in an appeal that there was some error in law. You can’t just say “wait, I don’t like that jury decision”.

      In this case, the jury decided that Apple had infringed. Under appeal, a judge has decided that there was an error in law. Quite a different thing. It takes a significant error to reverse a jury decision and a decision from an appeal judge is thus much stronger and far less likely to be again reversed — though such a thing is possible.

  3. The jury finds guilt but the judge orders the sentencing.

    In this case, the judge found that that the damages sought were too high. It is unclear if the entire case was thrown out or if the simply the damage amount was thrown out.

  4. You think it is interesting? Haven’t you ever heard of cases being appealed? Some go all the way to the Supreme Court you know. Juries often go way off track, awarding obscene amounts for small infractions. Texas is a popular place to sue, many cases are tried there.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.