iPhone 4S and Galaxy S III in hand

After Apple last September filed a motion to add the then a few months old Galaxy S III to its ongoing patent lawsuit against Samsung, and six more Galaxies on Black Friday, it was reported that a trial in that patent infringement case had been scheduled for March 2014. Needless to say, by the time this suit wraps up, Samsung will have sold plenty of flagship devices included in the suit.

Indeed, the Galaxy S III was introduced in May 2012. Samsung is now set to unveil its successor at New York City’s Radio City Music Hall as early as next week. But apparently even March 2014 is too early for Samsung as it now knows the hearings are postponed until it has a chance to exhaust appeals related to the $1.05 August 2012 verdict…

Deciding enough is enough, Apple yesterday filed a brief in federal court in San Jose, California, objecting to U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh’s decision last month to delay Apple’s Galaxy S III patent infringement assertions against Samsung until the South Korean conglomerate is done appealing the August 2012 verdict.

Bloomberg has Apple’s quote from the filing:

This case must proceed now, in order to stop the ongoing sales – and relentless launch – of Samsung’s latest infringing devices, which have caused, and every day continue to cause, continuing harm to Apple.

Of course, Samsung has readily embraced Koh’s ruling.

The second case should be put on hold, Samsung writes, to “promote judicial economy”. Lawyers for the company argue staying the case will “allow the parties to attempt to reach a business resolution of their disputes.”

Well, guess what?

Samsung hasn’t shown willingness so far to reach an amicable solution (Apple is also guilty of this), which leaves an impression it actually prefers litigation over direct talks.

Despite Apple’s legal victories against the Galaxy maker, Tim Cook is learning the hard way that the U.S. legal system often is a double-edged sword. Earlier this month, Judge Lucy Koh nearly halved the $1.05 billion verdict in damages to Apple down to $588 million.

The basis for the ruling?

The court has identified “an impermissible legal theory on which the jury based its award, and cannot reasonably calculate the amount of excess while effectuating the intent of the jury.”

Of course, she ordered a new trial to recalculate damages on the remainder, but the hearings are likely to be postponed until appeals from the first case are exhausted.

Making Apple’s legal initiatives more complicated, some of the remaining Samsung devices already are outdated.

Heck, even the smaller legal victories Apple scored against some Samsung devices in markets overseas pertain to products that either are no longer on sale or are about to be replaced with newer variants.

Don’t these judges know how the tech industry operates?

  • Andy

    Isn’t it $1.05 billion, or did I read it wrong?

  • What do they care, judges and lawyers are smiling at these two giants fighting one another, as every puch, kick, etc. impacted results in more money in their pockets.

    • RarestName

      You push, pull each others hair, scratch, claw, bit ’em
      Throw ’em down, pin ’em, so lost in the moments when you’re in ’em

  • TesticularFortitude

    For the sake of time, I’ll highlight the important points for everyone:


    • Andy

      Thank you.

      • TesticularFortitude

        Anytime mate!!

    • Liam Mulcahy


  • Metroview

    Apple’s too busy trying to get Samsung’s money instead of using that wasted time to really innovate their next iPhone and iOS…

    • And I’m sure you know exactly what Apple is doing behind the scenes right? You must have the inside track on how they spend their money and time too right?

      • Metroview

        Yes and yes. How’d you know!?

    • what do u expect ,if all ideas are being stolen by samsung

  • They are paying Apple $1.05 or you mean $1.05 billion.

  • Apple is acting like a pubescent girl with an acute case of jealousy.

  • I mean. Retina display is just a feeble attempt to compete with Samsung’s then and always brilliant display.

    • I hope your joking? AMOLED displays have problems, the latest 1080p phones are LCD not AMOLED and there is a specific reason for that. iPhone 4 at the time was the first mass produced consumer available phone with a very high pixel density, right on target color accuracy/saturation and brightness.

    • If you meant turning up the saturation to make everything more colorful and brighter is “brilliant” then you really are naive.

  • Anyway. Apple really needs to grow up. The jealousy. The fighting. They need to act more professional. “Oh, that is similar to our product, but not exactly, better not let them get any further ahead of us in the game. We made products that came stemming from their products. Hope nobody notices that. We would look like complete bitches.” Seriously, its like they’re playing street ball and apple elbows samsung in the face. Samsung doesnt call the foul cause they are respectable. But they elbow apple in the face and apple starts crying, calling the foul like a bitch. Apple has no respect from me. I don’t think they will ever earn back my respect. Bitches

  • SoCoMagNuM

    Wooooww…so Apple reason to rush the trial because the Galaxy S3 is selling? Lol that sounds about right. I got atleast 3 people from my job switch from iPhones to SG3. Shrugs