Apple wins $120M patent victory over Samsung on appeal

A U.S. appeals court overturned a $120 million patent infringement case against Samsung on Friday February 26^th, giving Samsung, a notable smart phone maker, a significant victory over its top rival Apple. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. asserts that Samsung didn’t infringe Apple's "quick links" patent. In addition, the jury found two of Apple’s patents to be invalid do to simplicity and the fact that they were not a unique art. I spoke with a current student at the Boalt Law School at Berkeley about this case and he says that in order for a patent to be deemed invalid, there must be substantial evidence that the patents make no new claims on top of pre-existing patents.

A Samsung representative said that this is a huge women because they are able to “keep their products out in the marketplace and out of the courtroom.”Apple and Samsung have been going head to head in the mobile networking space for over a decade, and the highly coveted technology patents can mean the difference in hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue. Apple has an extensive patent portfolio on some crucial parts of both software and hardware in the mobile phone space. Recently, Samsung was forced to pay Apple $548.2 million, which Samsung is currently in the appeals process.

The cases typically take years to unfold, as both companies go back and forth with claims of infringement and appeals. Samsung’s win in the appeal reverses a May 2014 decision from a California federal court ruling that ordered Samsung to pay $119.6 million for infringing on one of Apples patent.

Samsung was accused of infringing on the quick links feature, which enables reading of data from the screen, and linking it to other features in the phone. An example of this would be a phone number in an email, where someone could tap it and immediately begin making a phone call to that number.

http://www.engadget.com/2016/02/26/apple-vs-samsung-patent-award-overturned/

AVX Claims they are entitled to $37.5M from Greatbatch Ltd. in Patent Fight

AVX has filed papers with a Delaware court to abandon $37.5 million worth of patent infringement damages award to maker of medical implants Greatbatch Ltd. Greatbatch claims that AVX’s products were unfairly priced thus forcing Greatbatch to lower their prices. On January 26, eight jurors ruled that AVX infringed on Greatbatch’s patents, and the award was $37.5 million, $27 million which was for damages that Greatbatch could have made if it didn’t have to unfairly cut its prices. A writer for the street claims that, “the complaint, filed in April 2013, alleged that AVX had infringed Greatbatch patents by manufacturing and selling filtered feedthrough assemblies used in implantable pacemakers and cardioverter defibrillators that incorporate its patented technology.”

            U.S. District Judge Leonard Stark received a letter from AVX in February claiming that Greatbatch sold infringed products at a price that is said to be two to three times higher than it said it had sold the products. Greatbatch says that AVX was the sole cause of the lower prices, when AVX says that they could have sold their products at the same price that Greatbatch sold their products at. The main part of the claim of infringement comes with Greatbatch claiming that AVX’s production and sale of alternative components for medical devices, including pacemakers. AVX says that Greatbatch’s claims are late and faulty, and that it was Greatbatch’s choice to sell the products at the lower price.

Judge Stark refused to give Greatbatch damages on the products covered by Boston Scientific. He stands firm in his position that Greatbatch’s settlement money could be taken back if AVX shows that Greatbach’s lack of discosure interfered with the outcome of the case against AVX.

The specific patents they infringed on are U.S. Patent Number 5,333,095, which restricts the sale of a filter capacitor assembly that is used in the pacemaker. The U.S. Patent Number 5,905,627 is for an internally grounded ceramic feed-through filter capacitor assembly that protects pacemakers from signals that could interfere from cellular phones.

http://www.law360.com/articles/761579/avx-wants-37-5m-greatbatch-award-axed-in-patent-fight

http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/Greatbatch+(GB)+Awarded+$37.5M+in+Patent+Lawsuit+vs+AVX+(AVX)/11249697.html

Apple vs. VirnetX Case Overview

The US District Court ruled that Apple be mandated to pay $625 million to VirnetX, a patent troll based out of Nevada. This is the second time in a short 5 year span that patent troll VirnetX is suing Apple for infringement. The four patents that Apple Infringed on are

-       U.S. Patent #6,502,135

-       U.S. Patent #7,418,504

-       U.S. Patent #7,490,151

-       U.S. Patent #7,921,211

These patents are in the domain of internet security and are popularly used in VPN On-Demand, Imessage, and Facetime. The $625 million that Apple owes includes royalties from a 2012 case in which VirnetX sued for patent infringement. Caldwell Cassady & Curry represents VirnetX, and collects a healthy legal fee for a victory of this magnitude. They also represented them in the 2012 suits. Apple’s in house legal counsel represents them, and includes many legal experts in the area of patent infringement. Apple executives are furious with the ruling and calling for serious patent reform. Patent trolls continue to attack large technology corporations because it is an extremely profitable endeavor. In order to end patent trolling, we need to reform patent law to make it less opportune for companies like VirnetX.