US court reinstated $120 million jury award for Apple Inc against Samsung

News Hour:

A federal appeals court on Friday reinstated a $120 million jury award for Apple Inc against Samsung, marking the latest twist in the fierce patent war between the world’s top smartphone manufacturers.

The court said that there was substantial evidence for the jury verdict related to Samsung’s infringement of Apple patents on its slide-to-unlock and autocorrect features, as well as quick links, which automatically turn information like addresses and phone numbers into links, reports Reuters.

Friday’s decision was made by the full slate of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. In an 8-3 ruling, the judges said that a previous panel of the same court should not have overturned the verdict last February.

3D-printed Samsung and Apple logos are seen in this picture illustration made in Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina on January 26, 2016

3D-printed Samsung and Apple logos are seen in this picture illustration made in Zenica, Bosnia, and Herzegovina on January 26, 2016

The three-judge panel did not follow U.S. Supreme Court limits on the scope of its review because it examined evidence outside the record of the case, the decision said. Representatives for Samsung and Apple could not immediately be reached for comment.

The appeal stems from a May 2014 verdict from a federal court in San Jose, California, which ordered Samsung to pay $119.6 million for using the Apple features without permission.

Infringement of the quick links feature accounted for nearly $99 million of the damages. The jury had also found that Apple infringed a Samsung patent on digital photo technology and awarded $158,400 in damages. Friday’s decision upholds that award.

The two companies have been battling over mobile device technology patents for years, with Apple mostly prevailing. In December, Samsung paid Apple $548.2 million stemming from a separate patent case. Part of that dispute has been appealed to the Supreme Court, which will hear it on Tuesday.

James Gibson, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, said in an email to Reuters that Friday’s ruling is based on a procedural issue rather than a disagreement over patent law.

Avatar

This article has been posted by a News Hour Correspondent. For queries, please contact through [email protected]
No Comments

Translate this News

Join the Facebook Group

Click here to join the Facebook group of News Hour

Popular Posts

Sacred Games exposes Rajshri Deshpande nude [video]
Four Spain attacks suspects to go before judge, eight others killed
Still a long way to go in T20 format for Bangladesh
Hong Kong police shoot protester as protests start working week
UNICEF announces collaboration with telecommunications giant in drive for ‘Big Data’ for social good
UK Conservatives put $1.5 trillion price tag on Labour opposition plans

Advertisement

News of the Month

October 2016
S M T W T F S
« Sep   Nov »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: