Hasta La Gadget!

Fujitsu’s bank balance may be a little lighter today, since Acacia Research Corp. has reported that subsidiaries of both companies have signed a settlement deal over patent disputes. As usual, Acacia is keeping tight-lipped about exactly what the patents cover, but a little digging on our part has revealed they are related to flash memory and RAM technologies. The agreement resolves lawsuits in the works at district courts in Texas and California, which is probably a good thing. After all, these cases can get pretty messy when they go to court.

Continue reading Fujitsu and Acacia resolve patent disputes with settlement, keep it out of the courts

Filed under: Cellphones, Laptops, Tablets

Fujitsu and Acacia resolve patent disputes with settlement, keep it out of the courts originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:33:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  Ropes & Gray (1), (2)  | Email this | Comments

Samsung took a pretty major blow when the jury in its patent case against Apple delivered their verdict today. Apple was awarded damages exceeding $1 billion, and even though that isn’t as much as the iPhone maker was looking for, it’s still a pretty hefty amount for Samsung to have to pay. However, after the verdict was delivered, there were a couple of inconsistencies the jury had to address. In their verdict, the jurors awarded Apple damages for the Samsung Intercept’s infringement on the company’s ’915 utility patent, while it was also awarded damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 4G LTE‘s infringement on its ’889 design patent. The only problem is the jury awarded these damages without actually finding that the devices were infringing on the patents in question.

That’s pretty confusing to the outside observer, but it seems to be just an oversight on the jury’s part – there were a ton of claims for the jury to wade through during deliberation, remember. After these two inconsistencies were brought to light, The Verge reports that the jury left the courtroom once more to decide if the two devices actually did infringe on the patents. The jurors were gone for nearly an hour before they returned to the courtroom, and when they came back, they had the tiniest smidgen of good news for Samsung.

The jury now states that the Intercept and Galaxy Tab 10.1 didn’t infringe on those named patents, and that decision managed to shave around $2 million off the amount Samsung has to pay Apple. Now, instead of owing $1,051,885,000 to Apple, Samsung only owes $1,049,343,540. When we’re talking about dollar amounts that already come in over $1 billion, saving an extra $2 million really doesn’t amount to much. At this point, however, Samsung’s lawyers are probably just happy that the devices aren’t actually infringing on those Apple patents.

Now that the trial has come to a close, it’s time for Apple and Samsung to file their post-trial motions. Apple has until August 29 – next Wednesday – to file, and Samsung will have 14 days after that to respond. Once Samsung has filed its response on September 12, Apple will have only two days to file a response of its own. This will all culminate with a preliminary injunction hearing on September 20. Stay tuned folks, because even though the trial is over, the fight between Apple and Samsung isn’t finished yet.

Samsung’s damages decrease slightly as Koh sets date for injunction hearing is written by Eric Abent & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

In the Apple vs Samsung court case that’s been taking place over the past three weeks here in the USA, it appeared that Samsung would be taking the heaviest damages as a 1 billion 51 million 855 thousand dollar damages verdict was delivered against them. Apple would have their side of the verdict read against them soon after Samsung’s list of infringements against Apple’s patents, but at the end of the first half, Samsung took the heat.

In SEA, STA, and SEC, Samsung was found of willful patent infringement in many, many cases. Damages were listed by device, each of them a Samsung wallet emptier here upon Samsung’s very visible defeat.

• Infuse 4G: $44,792,974
• Prevail: $57,000,000+
• Mesmerize: $53,123,612
• Replenish: $3,350,256
• Transform: $954,060

And the list continued item by item until it was Apple’s turn to see if there were any infringements on Samsung patents. These patents had (and have) to do with utility patents and will one way or another not nearly be as expensive for Apple as Samsung’s damages have already been. This trial will almost certainly be seen as a major victory for Apple – stay tuned to SlashGear in our legal tag link to see the results as they continue to be unleashed.

Samsung damages over 1 billion dollars vs Apple is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

This trial is what might be the most important of the set of Apple vs Samsung courtroom sessions that’ve been going on around the world for several months. Another verdict was reached this week in South Korea where the law made it clear that both parties had done wrong, the iPhone, the iPad, the Galaxy S II, and the Galaxy S all being banned from sale in the country effective immediately. Several other sales bans have taken place over the summer and were relatively quickly lifted in their respective countries.

The court session began this afternoon with several checkings of the verdict form to make sure everything is in order. Since the document itself is quite a few pages long, noone was surprised, not even Judge Koh. As The Verge notes, Koh let the court know that “I saw Samsung’s request for 30 minutes to review the verdict form… I think that makes sense.”

Has the jury reached a verdict? Yes.

All of the devices listed were found to be infringing upon claim 19 of 301 patent including SEC, SEA, and STA: Galaxy Tab Wi-fi (SEA), Captivate (STA), Continuum, Droid Charge, Exhibit 4G, Galasy Ace, Prevail, S 4G, S II, Galaxy Tab, The Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Mesmerie, Nexus S 4G, Replenish and Vibrant.

For claim Two, Samsung devices were also found to infringe for SEC: For SEC Captivate, continuum, droid charge, fascinate, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S II, i9100, Galaxy S2 T-Mobile, Tab, Tab 10.1, Gem, Indulge, Infuse, Nexus S 4G. That’s for Claim 8 of 915 patent. For SEA there was infringement on the part of the Galaxy Tab 10.1, and for STA infringement on the part of the Captivate, Continuum, Droid Charge, Exhibit, Prevail, Galaxy S 4G, S II AT&T, SII T Mobile, Galaxy Tab, Gem, Indulge, Infuse 4G, Mesmerize, Nexus S 4G, Transform and Vibrant.

It was not looking positive for Samsung in the first few questions of the verdict, needless to say, and as the reading wore on, the damage continued. Stay tuned to SlashGear as we continue to run down the verdict and eventually get to the real dish: what Samsung and Apple will be responsible for in the end.

Samsung guilty on dozens of patent infringements vs Apple is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

For those of you wishing to stay in the Apple vs Samsung trial in the heat of the battle will love to see the highlights in Apple’s closing statement, complete with a few clips from a document that very well may have Samsung on the ropes. This document is what Apple calls the “copycat” document and was acquired by Apple from Samsung’s internal design process labs, a massive set of pages that include the screenshots you see here. The massive bulk of the document has Samsung making side-by-side comparisons between the original iPhone and their own original Galaxy smartphone, making notes on how iPhone design cues could help them improve their own smartphone lineup.

It was Apple attorney Harold McElhinny that spoke up in the case before Apple would rest, with words such as, “Witnesses can be mistaken. They can be mistaken in good faith. Exhibits that are created in a trial are always created with a purpose. They can confuse, and can mislead” stated to make way for the presentation of the documents you see above and below. “Historical documents are almost always where the truth lies,” noted MyElhinny, quoted by CNET, pointing out the internal Samsung documents.

With items such as curving the corners of the icons offered up in Samsung’s version of Android in response to the iPhone’s strikingly similar offering, Apple has here a document that’s going to play a giant role in the jury’s decisions in this case.

“They sat with the iPhone and went feature by feature, copying it to the smallest detail. In those critical three months, Samsung was able to copy and incorporate the core part of Apple’s four-year investment without taking any of the risks, because they were copying the world’s most successful product.” – McElhinny

Apple also came in for the throat with comments on how Samsung didn’t bring in as high a class of witness collection as they did. Apple brought in both Phil Schiller and Scott Forstall, for example, Apple senior executives, while Samsung did not bring any executives whatsoever. Part of the reasoning behind this decision may have been the fact that Samsung’s executives reside mainly in Korea, but no comment to this effect has been made.

“From the very beginning, Samsung has disrespected this process. Apple brought you two of its most senior executives: Schiller and Forstall. They were willing to face cross. No Samsung execs were willing to come here from Korea and answer questions under oath. Instead of witnesses, they sent you lawyers.” – McElhinny

Stay tuned to our legal tag as well as our tags for both Samsung and Apple to see what the end of this case will bring. It is quite possible that one or both of the players in this case will face millions of dollars in penalties and far-reaching legal damages well into the future. Judge Koh at the head of this case has made it clear that now with a 109 page instructions document ahead of them, the jury has some reading to do: “I need everyone to stay conscious during the reading of the jury instructions, including myself. …we’re going to periodically stand up, just to make sure we’re all alive.”

[Illustration via Vicki Ellen Behringer]

Apple closing statement brings most damning documents yet vs Samsung is written by Chris Burns & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.