A $368.2 million verdict against Apple has been upheld in the Eastern District of Texas, putting patent holding company VirnetX in a position to collect both royalties and damages from Apple if it continues to use its VPN and FaceTime technologies. Judge Leonard Davis ruled late Tuesday on Apple’s request for either a reduction in the damages or a new trial, denying both requests and ordering the two companies to work out a licensing deal on VirnetX’s patents
Apple Inc. (AAPL)’s iPhone didn’t violate patent rights owned by Google Inc. (GOOG)’s Motorola Mobility for a sensor that prevents accidental hang-ups, a U.S. International Trade Commission judge said today. The patent is invalid, ITC judge Thomas Pender said in a notice posted on the agency’s docket. The judge’s findings are subject to review by the full commission, which has the power to block imports of products that infringe U.S. patents. “We’re disappointed with this outcome and are evaluating our options,” Jennifer Erickson, a spokeswoman for Motorola Mobility, said in an e-mail.
Those $12.5 Billion spent by Google on Motorola are looking good.
“Samsung has decided to withdraw our injunction requests against Apple on the basis of our standard essential patents pending in European courts, in the interest of protecting consumer choice,” the Suwon, South Korea-based company said in an e-mailed statement today. The decision on European lawsuits comes hours after a U.S. court ruled it wouldn’t ban sales of 26 Samsung products in a patent lawsuit.
Translation: We had no chance in hell of winning using “Standard Essential Patents”, so we dropped it before getting our asses handed to us.
And that’s the wonder of Samesung.
FOSS Patents:
Following a hearing in the morning, a federal judge in the Western District of Wisconsin has canceled an Apple v. Motorola Mobility trial that was scheduled to start today at 1 PM Central Time and has dismissed the entire case with prejudice, meaning that the only way Apple can salvage these claims is through an appeal (but not through refiling in another U.S. district court).
Judge cancels trial, tosses Apple’s FRAND lawsuit against Google’s Motorola Mobility
Electronista:
Apple has lost an injunction bid that would have allowed it to continue selling iPhone-branded products in Mexico. A court in Mexico City handed down a ruling last Thursday denying Apple’s injunction request on the grounds that the iPhone brand is too phonetically similar to iFone, a brand belonging to a Mexican company that registered its name four years prior to Apple’s filing for the iPhone brand mark. The decision stems from a legal action that Apple initially filed in 2009 requesting that the company cease using the iFone brand in order to head off the possibility of consumer confusion.
Ay Caramba!
FOSS Patents:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has good news for Samsung, and Samsung has already shared it with Judge Koh in a late-night filing. In a non-final Office action the USPTO has declared all 20 claims of Apple’s rubber-banding patent (U.S. Patent No, 7,469,381invalid, including claim 19, which Apple successfully asserted against Samsung in the summer trial in California.
Patent office tentatively invalidates Apple’s rubber-banding patent used in Samsung trial
FOSS Patents:
On Saturday, the English edition of Japanese newspaper The Asahi Shimbun revealed rulings by the Tokyo District Court that had already come down on September 14 and October 11. About a year ago, Samsung had brought three claims against the iPhone 4S. The September 14, 2012 ruling reportedly held Apple not to infringe a Samsung patent related to app downloads, and the October 11, 2012 ruling was apparently based on doubts about the validity of a patent relating to the in-flight (airplane) mode. I interpret the report by Asahi Shimbun staff writer Ryo Takano to the effect that the patent wasn’t considered a non-obvious innovation over the prior art.
Japanese court rejects two of Samsung’s patent infringement claims against Apple
BBC:
Apple still needs to run ads saying Samsung had not infringed its rights.
Awkward.
