“The so-called ‘Graham factors’ [see full article] played a leading role in the Federal Appeals Court’s decision Wednesday to reverse, vacate and remand to another court the U.S. International Trade Commissions 2012 dismissal of an Apple complaint against Motorola Mobility — now part of Google. Apple claimed that Motorola had infringed two key smartphone patents — patents that Apple has also asserted in its high-profile case against Samsung,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune.
“‘We are troubled by the ITC’s obviousness analysis,’ the appeals court wrote in a stinging repudiation of the ITC’s analysis of the case. ‘We have repeatedly held that evidence relating to all four Graham factors — including objective evidence of secondary considerations — must be considered,'” P.E.D. reports. “Those secondary considerations are the ones that anybody with eyes who has shopped for a mobile phone in the past six years can’t miss seeing.”
P.E.D. reports, “It was the second time in a week that the ITC was schooled by a higher authority for ruling against Apple.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Apple notches yet another significant win in smartphone patent war – August 7, 2013
Apple wins U.S. patent appeal against Google; Samsung indirectly affected – August 7, 2013
Apple’s last-minute rescue by the Obama administration – August 7, 2013
Samsung shares extend losses ahead of U.S. Apple patent ruling – August 7, 2013
Why Samsung may fear Obama administration’s U.S. ITC Apple ban veto – August 5, 2013
Samsung sheds over $1 billion in market value after U.S. Trade Representative Froman vetoes Apple ban – August 5, 2013
How the ITC blew it, forcing a presidential veto in the Samsung-Apple patent case – August 5, 2013
Apple: ‘Samsung was wrong to abuse the patent system’ – August 5, 2013
South Korea concerned about U.S. decision to overrule Apple iPhone, iPad sales ban – August 5, 2013
Obama administration vetoes Apple iPhone sales ban in U.S. – August 3, 2013
Google ready to ditch Android over its intellectual property issues? – July 29, 2013
The government accounting office probably gave them the cheapest PCs and Android phones imaginable. Given that it’s a government department, I’d bet my bottom dollar that it’s wall to wall Dells from hell running Windows Vista. They probably get fisted by Microsoft every day of the week.
It’s also a given that they’ll be given el-cheapo $199 Android dumbphones which must suck big time but they’ve probably become inured to the sucking and think that it’s normal to have a sucky phone.
Thus, when they’re confronted with true Apple class, viz. the iPhone, Macintosh and iPad, they probably freak and have revenge uppermost on their minds. And so every opportunity they get, they slam Apple against the wall, whether warranted or not. More often than not as a reaction to having to put up with atrocious Dells and Samsung shitphones in the workplace.
“Given that it’s a government department, I’d bet my bottom dollar that it’s wall to wall Dells from hell running Windows Vista.”
You’d probably lose that dollar. The are more than likely still running Windows XP.
When I left my government job in 2010 to work for a certain fruit themed computer company, the government office was still running windows 2000. There was excited whispered talk that we were gonna get Windows XP anyday now.
“Those secondary considerations are the ones that anybody with eyes who has shopped for a mobile phone in the past six years can’t miss seeing.”
YOUCH! Translation: “Use your brains you f’ing morons!”
Judge Lucy Koh, open your freakin’ eyes!
That’s a Philip’s quote, not a quote from the text of the decision. Just sayin…
But the thing is that was what the judges said in there ruling translated into plain english and not legal speak.
To quote the judges: “We are troubled by the ITC’s obviousness analysis, We have repeatedly held that evidence relating to all four Graham factors — including objective evidence of secondary considerations — must be considered.”
Meaning that the ITC judges completely ignored the “Four Graham Factors” for obviousness and non obviousness.
In other words they failed miserably to do there jobs.
There vs. their aside, I’m just saying, it would have counted for a lot more had the quote come from the legal body rather than a journalist. And by this I do not mean to, in any way, denigrate Philip Elmer-DeWitt, whose work I admire immensely.
Brains and the government employees aka elected elite? Not proper in the same sentence.
U.S. ITC
Pronounced “You sit….see?”
401K…… Need I say more?
This is the part that got me. I’ve abbreviated the first list to get to my point:
The Court held that obviousness should be determined by examining:
. . .
• Objective evidence of nonobviousness.
As for the latter,, the Court outlined examples of factors that show “objective evidence of nonobviousness.” They are:
• Commercial success
• Long-felt but unsolved needs, and
• The failure of others.
These three ‘nonobviousness’ factors are also part of the point of Apple’s existence. They invent devices and software people want, solve people’s needs, and make up for the fact that NO ONE ELSE is capable of making them. So reward Apple already. Otherwise, all we’re ever going to see in the marketplace is… the obvious. Yawn.
Just part of the anti-business mentality of this administration.
From the information I can find, three of the 6 Commissioners who sit on the ITC were appointed by the current administration (to be more precise, the previous administration, as the appointments were made during President Obama’s first term), and each of those appointees is a Republican. The mix of the ITC is required to be 3 from each of the two rudderless parties that are hell-bent on ruining our country. So, it seems that there’s not much of a reason to ascribe their findings to the administration or its current beliefs.
Me thinks that when Apple takes the e-book case to the Supreme Court, things will also work out in their favor.
I would guess that some of these Institutions and Government bodies have ulterior motive$ in their findings.
From Judge Reyna:
“The Smartphone has defined modern life. Be it in the workplace, the home, airports, or entertainment venues across America, individuals are tethered to their handheld devices. Not long ago, users primarily spoke into these devices. Today, fingers tapping, grazing, pinching, or scrolling the screen is a ubiquitous image that reflects how we conduct business, work, play, and live. The asserted patent in this case is an invention that has propelled not just technology, but also dramatically altered how humans across the globe interact and communicate. It marks true innovation.”
That quote should be quted repetedly, underscored and underlined as fact and preface to every Apple analsist’s opinion.
Wouldn’t hurt to tattoo in on to the forheads of comatose congressmen too.
… Quoted repeatedly..