Skip to main content

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

See All Stories
Site default logo image

You’ve seen Apple’s internal memo to employees on the verdict, now here’s Samsung’s

We were the first to deliver Tim Cook’s internal memo on Apple’s trial victory.  Here’s the other side of the coin:

[Internal Memo] Regarding the Jury Verdict in California

On Friday, August 24, 2012, the jury verdict in our trial against Apple was announced at the US District Court for the Northern District of California. The following is an internal memo that reflects Samsung’s position regarding the verdict:

We initially proposed to negotiate with Apple instead of going to court, as they had been one of our most important customers. However, Apple pressed on with a lawsuit, and we have had little choice but to counter-sue, so that we can protect our company.

Certainly, we are very disappointed by the verdict at the US District Court for the Northern District of California (NDCA), and it is regrettable that the verdict has caused concern amongst our employees, as well as our loyal customers.

However, the judge’s final ruling remains, along with a number of other procedures. We will continue to do our utmost until our arguments have been accepted.

The NDCA verdict starkly contrasts decisions made by courts in a number of other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Korea, which have previously ruled that we did not copy Apple’s designs. These courts also recognized our arguments concerning our standards patents.

History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.

We trust that the consumers and the market will side with those who prioritize innovation over litigation, and we will prove this beyond doubt.

If, when you read “History has shown there has yet to be a company that has won the hearts and minds of consumers and achieved continuous growth, when its primary means to competition has been the outright abuse of patent law, not the pursuit of innovation.” you thought “Microsoft!”, you are not alone.
Expand
Expanding
Close

Site default logo image

Apple to judge: Samsung intentionally ‘spoiled’ documents

Apple filed a motion in the Northern District of California on May 1 that claimed Samsung ruined documents it needed to submit for the discovery process in a “spoilation of evidence,” according to the legal jargon that described the act. NetworkWorld elaborated:

  • In effect, Apple wants the Judge to instruct the jury as follows:
  • 1. Samsung had a duty to preserve relevant evidence, failed to do so, and acted in bad faith in failing to meet its legal duty.
  • 2. The jury may infer that documents Samsung failed to produce would have been advantageous to Apple’s position.
  • 3. If the jury finds Samsung liable for infringement, they may presume that the infringement was “intentional, willful, without regard to Apple’s rights.”
  • Apple’s motion doesn’t pull any punches, accusing Samsung of spoilating “vast quantities of relevant evidence in blatant disregard of its duty to preserve all such evidence.” Consequently, Apple writes that strong adverse inference instructions are required.

A hearing on Apple’s motion is scheduled for June 7, with Samsung’s reply brief due by May 15. However, Samsung said the claims are without merit, and it wants the due date extended to May 29. It is also seeking to have the matter’s hearing pushed to July 10, 2012, but Apple wasted no time and quickly filed a reply on May 7 that asked Samsung’s motion to be denied.


Expand
Expanding
Close

US Judge says Samsung tablets do infringe Apple patents but doesn’t issue an injunction

Site default logo image

US District Judge Lucy Koh came down on Samsung today for infringing on Apple’s patents in a preliminary hearing on Apple’s request to bar some Galaxy products from being sold in the United States. She stopped short of issuing an injunction however, like her Australian counterpart yesterday, saying that Apple may have some issues establishing the validity of its patents.

Apple and Samsung have been at each others’ throats in more than 20 districts around the world. The fight has ensnarled some of the two companies’ partners and vendors.

Mobile providers Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile USA have opposed Apple’s request, arguing that a ban on Galaxy products would cut into holiday sales.

Apple must show that Samsung infringed its patents and that its patents are valid under the law.

At the hearing on Thursday in a San Jose, California federal court, Koh also said she would deny Apple’s request for an injunction based on one of Apple’s so-called “utility” patents.

She did not say whether she would grant the injunction based on three other Apple “design” patents.

Koh characterized her thoughts on the utility patent as “tentative” but said she would issue a formal order “fairly promptly.

The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Apple Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co Ltd et al, 11-1846.


Expand
Expanding
Close