courtroom gavel

Apple and Samsung may have called a truce in patent litigation overseas, but here in the United States, they’re still locked in a heated battle. The two firms are wrapping up post-trial hearings from their 2012 meeting, and they’ve just begun post-trial activities for this year’s lawsuit.

This week a significant development has occurred, which could have a major impact in the ongoing fight. The US Patent Office has rejected several claims of one of the patents Apple asserted against Samsung in their most recent infringement trial, saying certain parts aren’t valid…

Here’s more from FOSS Patents’ Florian Mueller:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has very recently rejected multiple claims of Apple’s ‘172 autocomplete patent, including claim 18, the one asserted against Samsung in the second California litigation. […]

The legal standard is stricter in the infringement case (especially now at the JMOL stage) than in reexamination, where clear and convincing evidence is sufficient to reject a patent claim, but it looks awkward that Judge Koh held Samsung to infringe a patent claim that the USPTO probably wouldn’t have granted if it had been aware of all of the relevant prior art.

In a recent filing, Samsung drew Judge Koh’s attention to this ruling, essentially saying that the USPTO agreed that there is enough prior art to invalidate Apple’s autocomplete patent, and her ruling should be reexamined. Expect things to get very interesting in post-trial proceedings.

It’s worth noting that the decision by the United States Patent and Trademark Office is a preliminary one, and could take several months or even years to conclude. Still, it could hold weight with Judge Koh, who has the power to cut the $120 million Samsung has to pay Apple in damages.

  • Wonder if that implies there’ll be no more lawsuits for slide to unlock and rectangular SpartPhones/Tablets…

    • Have you ever heard of the saying “There’s no such thing as bad publicity”? Both sides will continue to play war in a legal minefield for this reason alone. Of course both sides feel very strongly about their intellectual property and will fight till death for it, so there’s that too…

      I don’t think Apple and Samsung lawsuits are going anywhere just yet even though they’ve both agreed to settle things overseas…

      • Sadly, I think you’re right…

      • Emily Richard

        Is she the only judge in all of California?

    • Tim Farris

      not sure but lawsuits like that ergots a wast of time i mean really why waste your time on something like that they are copying you only means that they suck and need to make a better device but can’t shows how desperate they are to design/sue if you know what i mean but still why waste time on a stupid lawsuit like this when u could just make a new device that has android sucks echoed in the back lol jk 😛 but really just make a new device plus if you haven’t seen the new pics apple is moving away from the square look its now gonna be a rounded look if you haven’t been following the blog here then i recommend you look at there pics they have posted the topic is ”
      Apple said to unveil iPhone 6 on September 9″

      • I’ve seen the pics, it’s still rectangular with curved edges from the front and back…nothing wrong with that, but can’t be patenting one of the few generic ways to design a SmartPhone/Tablet.

      • Your Mother

        it looks exactly like the HTC M7/M8 just has the camera in a different position.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        All of that, and not one period(.). Wow!

    • Your Mother

      slide to unlock was clearly a case of prior art, cant understand how these things hold up in court.

  • Your Mother

    Im so sick of Ms Lucy. Is she the only judge in all of California?