Apple Loses Nearly Half of $1B Award in New Ruling —Reuters, Guardian, BVWire, Others

Judge Cuts Apple Award Versus Samsung, Sets New Damages Trial

 Poornima Gupta and Erin Smith report at Reuters report that Apple Inc had a major setback in its mobile patents battle with Samsung Electronics.  On Friday, March 1st, a federal judge slashed a $1.05 billion jury award by more than 40 percent and set a new trial to determine damages. Here’s more:  

Apple Inc had a major setback in its mobile patents battle with Samsung Electronics on Friday, as a federal judge slashed a $1.05 billion jury award by more than 40 percent and set a new trial to determine damages.

Apple won the award last year against Samsung in what was the biggest and highest-profile of a number of legal trials around the world, centered on the use and alleged abuse of patents in a highly competitive mobile market.  The iPhone maker convinced the jury that the Korean company, which in 2012 overtook Apple as the global smartphone leader, had infringed on its iPhone and iPad patents.

Friday’s ruling by Judge Lucy Koh of the U.S. District Court Northern District of California in San Jose means the two mobile electronics companies may once again square off in a California court to decide how much of the $450.5 million struck from the damages, associated with 14 Samsung products, should stand.

BVWire: The Difference is Between “Utility Patents” and “Design Patents” 

BVWire explains: 

Last Friday, the federal court decided a good portion of the $1 billion damages award in Apple v. Samsung—the continuing battle of two Goliaths in the smartphone industry—was based on an “impermissible legal theory.”     That is, the court confirmed its earlier ruling that holders of design patents may recover an infringer’s entire profits, without the need to split damages between the patented design and the overall product. But the holders of utility patents can recover only their own lost profits (proved to a reasonable certainty) and/or a reasonable royalty. Since the jury’s award to Apple was apparently based on Samsung’s profits for the entire smartphone device, its patented design and utility functions—and the court couldn’t reduce the excess without “bending over backwards”—it slashed $450 million from the original award and sent the giants back to battle the question of damages. 

Before any new trial, however, the court suggested both sides might want to appeal its decision, which also discredited Apple’s expert for using an “aggressive” notice date for all the patents, when a more “circumspect” approach might have avoided a retrial. Read the complete digest of Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK (N.D. Cal., March 1, 2013) in the April Business Valuation Update; the court’s decision will be posted soon atBVLaw.

“The court has identified an impermissible legal theory on which the jury based its award and cannot reasonably calculate the amount of excess while effectuating the intent of the jury,” Koh said in her ruling.

 Patents Can Be Worth Quite a Bit, as the Apple/Samsung Battle Has Shown

see also:

U.S. Judge Will Not Suspend Apple Siri Patent Case vs. Samsung —SiliconValley.com  [3/8/2013]

U.S. Judge Reduces Apple’s Patent Award in Samsung Case —Wall Street Journal  [3/1/2013]

Apple and Samsung Smartphone Patent Row Set for New Jury Trial —The Guardian  [3/4/2013]

Apple v. Samsung: A Battle Over Billions —Cnet.com  [Roundup, Multiple Dates]

How Samsung is Out-Innovating Apple —CNN.com  [2/21/2013]