“The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit didn’t clearly signal which way it intended to rule, but the three-judge panel that heard arguments by the two companies questioned portions of a trial judge’s ruling last December favoring Samsung,” Kendall reports. “In that earlier ruling, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, Calif. decided that an injunction against 26 Samsung products wasn’t appropriate.”
Kendall report, “Judge Koh said Apple had not been able to show that it lost sales because Samsung infringed the iPhone maker’s patents. Apple lawyer William F. Lee argued that Samsung deliberately copied the company’s ‘revolutionary’ iPhone that took Apple five years and $5 billion to develop. The case was a ‘classic’ instance in which a rival should be banned for selling products because of patent infringement, Mr. Lee said. Samsung lawyer Kathleen Sullivan argued that paying monetary compensation to Apple would be an adequate remedy for any infringement and said that a product injunction wasn’t warranted.”
Read more in the full article here.
Apple to judges: not banning Samsung products would be a ‘fundamental change’ in patent law – August 9, 2013
Apple asks U.S. appeals court to halt Samsung’s slavish copying – August 9, 2013
Apple seeks sales ban on Samsung mobile devices in U.S. ITC, court cases – August 9, 2013
Apple faces three major legal showdowns Friday – August 8, 2013