US judge rules Samsung tablets infringe Apple

 

Apple still needs to prove validity of some patent claims.

A US judge deemed Samsung's Galaxy tablets to infringe Apple's patents on Thursday but warned Apple would have a problem establishing the validity of its patents in the latest courtroom face-off between the technology giants.

 

US District Judge Lucy Koh has yet to rule on Apple's request to bar some Galaxy products from being sold in the United States.

Apple and Samsung are engaged in a bruising legal battle that includes more than 20 cases in 10 countries as the two jostle for the top spot in the smartphone and tablet markets.

Earlier on Thursday, an Australian court slapped a temporary ban on the sale of Samsung's latest computer tablet in that country.

Apple sued Samsung in the United States in April, saying the South Korean company's Galaxy line of mobile phones and tablets "slavishly" copies the iPhone and iPad.

Apple then filed a request in July to bar some Samsung products from US sale, including the Galaxy S 4G smartphone and the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet.

Mobile providers Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile USA have opposed Apple's request, arguing that a ban on Galaxy products would cut into holiday sales.

Apple must show both that Samsung infringed its patents and that its patents are valid under the law.

Samsung attorney Kathleen Sullivan argued that in order to defeat an injunction bid, it need only show that it has raised strong enough questions about the validity of Apple's patents.

"We think we've clearly raised substantial questions," Sullivan said at the hearing on Thursday.

Apple attorney Harold McElhinny said the Cupertino giant's product design is far superior to previous tablets, so its patents should not be invalidated by designs that came before.

"It was the design that made the difference," McElhinny said.

Koh frequently remarked on the similarity between each company's tablets. At one point during the hearing, she held one black glass tablet in each hand above her head and asked Sullivan if she could identify which company produced which.

"Not at this distance your honor," said Sullivan, who stood at a podium roughly three metres away.

"Can any of Samsung's lawyers tell me which one is Samsung and which one is Apple?" Koh asked.

A moment later, one of the lawyers supplied the right answer.

Koh said she would deny Apple's request for an injunction based on one of Apple's so-called "utility" patents.

She did not say whether she would grant the injunction based on three other Apple "design" patents.

Koh characterized her thoughts on the utility patent as "tentative" but said she would issue a formal order "fairly promptly".

"It took a long time to make that distinction," Koh said.

After the hearing, Samsung spokesman Kim Titus said Apple's injunction request is "groundless."

(Editing by Tim Dobbyn, Steve Orlofsky, Richard Chang and Alex Richardson)


US judge rules Samsung tablets infringe Apple
 
 
 
Top Stories
Can the ATO use IT to shed its old-school reputation?
Inside the ‘reinvention’ at the hands of new management.
 
JB Hi-Fi's new CIO gets 'clean slate' for change
New AusPost, Tabcorp exec to get his hands dirty.
 
 
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...
Latest articles on BIT Latest Articles from BIT
Xero updates Android app
Aug 5, 2015
A new Android version of Xero Touch - the mobile companion app for the Xero cloud accounting ...
The 5 Windows 10 privacy issues you should be aware of
Jul 31, 2015
There are a few unsettling details when it comes to Windows 10 privacy
Windows 10 is here! (For some)
Jul 29, 2015
Delivery of the free upgrade versions of Windows 10 began today - have you got yours yet?
Microsoft reveals Microsoft Send, a new enterprise chat app to rival Slack
Jul 27, 2015
Microsoft Send is MSN Messenger for grownups, and you could be using it at work very soon
Developers offered $500,000 grants to find HoloLens uses
Jul 8, 2015
Can augmented-reality end up in business?
Latest Comments
Polls
Should law enforcement be able to buy and use exploits?



   |   View results
Yes
  14%
 
No
  51%
 
Only in special circumstances
  17%
 
Yes, but with more transparency
  18%
TOTAL VOTES: 843

Vote