Apple-Samsung Damages Redux Kicks off in Silicon Valley


As Apple seeking $1 billion from its long-known rival Samsung Electronics Co, the long-going go-round smartphone patent-infringement dispute has seen its peak results.

Apple claim Samsung infringed three design patents related to iphone - and also want an extra $5 million for infringing two utility patents, based on Samsung's total phone revenues minus costs.

Two expert witnesses, called by Apple, testified to the sums being reasonable.

Dame Tessa Jowell dies aged 70 after battle with brain tumour
The family spokesman said: "It is with great sadness, and an enormous sense of loss, that we announce the death of Tessa Jowell ". The former social worker lost to her Conservative rival, and was defeated again in the following year's general election .

The legal dispute started in 2011 when Apple sued Samsung. Their sole job, Apple lawyer Bill Lee said, is to determine what damages Apple can collect. 'It's a particularly significant period for Samsung to have been infringing, ' Vellturo said, given this is the point the customer enters such an ecosystem. However, Apple may still be able to convince the jury that the devices would not have been marketable without the infringing designs and therefore the phones as a whole should be considered the relevant article. The jury is considering all the facts and thinking about what amount Samsung should pay for all the damages that it has caused to Apple. 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. In its opinion, lower courts should not always consider that the end product is the "relevant article of manufacture" in patent infringement cases. Apple originally sought $2.75 billion in damages.

At issue were design features by now familiar to consumers: a black, rectangular, round-cornered phone front, a surrounding rim, known as the "bezel" and a grid of 16 colorful icon. Judge Lucy Koh, who presided over a previous retrial, instituted a "Groundhog Day" rule, according to the BBC, meaning that no new evidence can be introduced, and the jury must not re-adjudicate the initial verdict that Samsung was found to have infringed on Apple's patents. Apple was initially granted $1.05bn (£772m) in 2012 after a jury found the South Korean firm had encroached a few of the iPhone's developments. Whereas Samsung is fighting that it should give a lesser value for a portion of the iPhone's value.

"They're seeking profits on the entire phone", Samsung lawyer John Quinn apparently argued. It "does not exist apart from, and can not be separated from, the infringing Samsung phones."Koh will let Kare and other Apple experts cite evidence from the first trial of Samsung's deliberate copying of the iPhone design".