Apple Inc. (AAPL), Samsung Battle To Hit Court Next Month

0
Apple Inc. (AAPL), Samsung Battle To Hit Court Next Month
<a href="https://pixabay.com/users/ElisaRiva/">ElisaRiva</a> / Pixabay

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (LON:BC94) (KRX:005930) will continue their courtroom saga on patents starting August 9, 2013. This is for Apple’s appeal on the decision made by Judge Lucy Koh over the denial for a permanent injunction against Samsung gadgets.

Apple Inc. (AAPL), Samsung Battle To Hit Court Next Month

Apple To Argue For An Injunction

FOSS Patents‘ Florian Mueller explained, “For formal reasons, today’s notice mentions that “the panel of judges that will decide the appeal, upon further consideration, may yet disallow oral argument”, but this would require a unanimous finding that the appeal is frivolous, redundant or can be decided based on the record, none of which is realistically going to happen in this high-profile case. So come August 9,WilmerHale’s Bill Lee will argue Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)’s case for an injunction and Quinn Emanuel’s Kathleen Sullivan will defend Judge Koh’s decision.”

Nomad Investment Partnership: Keep An Eye On The Unseen Risks

Tail RiskThere are many ways to define risk. Warren Buffett has said that "risk comes from not knowing what you're doing." Q3 2020 hedge fund letters, conferences and more His mentor, Benjamin Graham, believed that risk should be measured as the chance of a permanent capital impairment of an investment. Seth Klarman also holds this view. Read More


Wouldn’t Be Fair To Ban Samsung Gadgets

The reason Koh nixed the ban was because the list of infringed patents only applied to a smaller number of features available on the questioned phone models. She elaborated that it wouldn’t be fair to ban Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (LON:BC94) (KRX:005930) gadgets over a few protected functions.

Mueller added, “Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) argues that Judge Koh’s decision can be reversed by a panel, but this argument is mostly based on the claim that a permanent injunction requires a different equitable analysis than a preliminary injunction. If the panel doesn’t agree that the “causal nexus” requirement should apply only to preliminary (pre-trial) and not permanent (post-trial) injunctions, then it may decide to proposal a full-court review of the matter, which would mean a second hearing before a final Federal Circuit ruling comes down.”

The war between the tech giants is nowhere near being finished but perhaps the two companies will meet the same ground in this next battle. Litigations take money and time, it would fare better if both Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (LON:BC94) (KRX:005930) found a way to reach an agreement.

No posts to display