Apple Wants $1 Billion From Samsung In Damages Retrial

Doris Richards
May 16, 2018

Lee argued that the iPhone's design is a major part of what made it a top seller, and that Samsung deliberately copied the black screen, rounded corners, bezels and application layout to boost sales. This will be the third court appearance over the same five design infringements.

Two of the world's biggest smartphone makers - Samsung and Apple - have resumed a seven-year-old patent infringement dispute in the US.

That figure, according to Samsung, comes to $28 million. It infringed three design patents and two utility patents awarded to Apple to cover early models of its popular smartphone.

Samsung attorney John Quinn held up components to the jury, emphasizing that each was its own article of manufacture and that there are "hundreds of articles of manufacture inside a phone". Apple is arguing that not only should Samsung pay the entire $399 million (which applies specifically to the two patents mentioned above) but the original $1 billion because "article of manufacture" consists of the whole phone. Expert Michael Wagner is expected to offer evidence of how much Apple spends on items such as screen glass to help calculate damages. "None of the patents is the whole phone". It argues that customers were not only buying its handsets because of the design, but also due to their "functionality". Should the fee be based on the money Samsung made from the total cost of its devices, or should it be based specifically on the infringing components? It depends on how the jury - and we should note that it is very hard to find local peers in Silicon Valley that know nothing of Apple and Samsung these days - sees it.

During Quinn's opening statements, Koh asked the jury to leave the room twice.

Samsung's lawyers appealed the case, bringing down the compensation of $1 billion to $400 million in 2015 at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case centers on the issue of what exactly constitutes an "article of manufacture" that a patent governs.

In December 2016, eight Supreme Court judges sided with its argument, and ruled that it was wrong that lower courts should always consider the "relevant article of manufacture" in such cases to be the final product sold to consumers.

Apple's belief is that its amount should be based on the full value of the iPhone. It was ordered to pay the U.S. tech giant more than $1 billion for infringing on three of Apple's design patents related to mobile devices - the quick links to phone numbers, the slide-to-unlock feature and the auto-correct function.

The lawsuit will be about what damages Apple can extract from sales of Samsung smartphones. Koh has forbidden that argument on the ground that Samsung didn't raise it in the previous trial or on appeal.

Other reports by Iphone Fresh

Discuss This Article