Samsung Must Pay Apple $548M In Smartphone IP Row

The court upheld the district court’s determination that Samsung infringed on some of Apple’s patented iPhone technology but also found that Samsung should have prevailed over Apple’s “trade dress” arguments.

Despite a decision being made to award Apple damages amassing up to $120m, the company went ahead to appeal the decision seeking to stop Samsung from selling phones that bore the disputed features. Given that Samsung’s mobile business is now focused on later iterations of those devices such as the Samsung Galaxy S6 and the Note 5, the ruling will have only a minor effect on its bottom line. However, this latest decision seeks to overturn the previous rejection by two of the three judges overseeing the dispute. But the appeals court found that Apple’s request for an injunction that requires Samsung to remove technology considered important to iPhone consumers was fair, observing, “The right to exclude competitors from using one’s property rights is important”.

Samsung vowed to ask the Federal Circuit, a Washington, D.C.-based court that hears the nation’s patent appeals, to rehear the case with its full roster of judges.

Juries in two separate federal court trials in San Jose, California, decided some of the features in Samsung’s phones and tablets infringed on Apple’s patents covering iPhone innovations.

Samsung sided with Prost’s position.

Samsung has lost its lawsuit against Apple over the “slide to unlock” feature on touch-screen smartphones, sources said.

It added, “We want to reassure our millions of loyal customers that all of our flagship smartphones, which are wanted and loved by American consumers, will remain for sale and available for customer service support in the US”.

The war between Samsung and Apple has been around for quite some time now. The Federal Circuit last month turned aside Samsung’s bid to delay…

Samsung has introduced ideas of its own which Apple has then followed up on such as phablets.

The rulingwhich covers Apple patents for slide-to-unlock, autocorrect, and quicklinksis the latest in a four-year legal tussle.

Howard Mintz covers legal affairs.