Jury finds Samsung owes Apple another $290 million
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Jury finds Samsung owes Apple another $290 million

A jury has found that Samsung owes Apple another $290 million for infringing Apple’s smartphone patents, bringing the total damages to around $900 million

In August last year, a jury at the same district court in San Jose decided that Samsung had infringed five utility and design patents relating to the iPhone and awarded Apple over $1 billion in damages. But Judge Lucy Koh found that part of the award had been improperly calculated and reduced the total by $450 million.

Today’s verdict came at the end of a retrial solely focused on determining damages based on lost profits and royalties, as Samsung’s infringement of the patents was established in the previous jury trial. Apple requested an additional $380 million in damages, while Samsung argued that it only owed another $52 million.

Samsung attorney Bill Price asked Koh to declare a mistrial because of what Price described as “racist” comments by a lawyer representing Apple, but Koh refused to do so.

Samsung made about $3.5 billion from the infringing products, which included the Galaxy S 4G, Galaxy S II Showcase, Fascinate, Vibrant and Mesmerize.

A separate trial will take place in March next year in relation to newer phone models, such as the Galaxy 4 and Note 2, and a counterclaim regarding Apple’s iPhone 5.

In a separate case on Monday, the Federal Circuit ordered a California district judge to reconsider a December 2012 ruling refusing to ban certain Samsung products found to infringe on Apple’s patents relating to mobile devices.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Keith Bergelt, CEO of the Open Invention Network, explains why AI technologies were not part of an update to its cross-licensing project
Kirkland & Ellis partners explain how they secured the dismissal of a patent case in which the other side had lied under oath
Managing IP understands the association had been considering other options, including Madrid or Vienna, after concerns were raised over Dubai’s positions on various rights
Chris Marando tells Managing IP that he's excited to work on PTAB matters at Perkins Coie, which recently hired another lawyer from his former firm
To mark Pride month, Darren Smyth, cochair of IP Out, says the legal profession must not forget that some members still face exclusion and hostility
Lawyers say the opening of the Milan central division this month is likely to boost activity in Italy, which has been modest so far
Sharon Urias tells us why she still has to explain the difference between copyright and trademarks
In the latest episode, Managing IP is joined by Gwilym Roberts and Lee Davies from the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys to discuss the UPC, IP ministers, diversity and more
Lawyers at Tomkins and Bomhard IP explain how they finally secured victory over McDonald’s in long-running ‘Big Mac’ trademark dispute
Technical excellence is paramount for clients looking to hire new advisers, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 corporate counsel
Gift this article