The Monday brief comes in response to Samsung’s Aug. 15 motion to dismiss, which characterizes Apple’s patent-infringement suit as “a hodgepodge of poorly pled non-patent counterclaims.”
“Apple’s strategy amounts to little more than an attempt to smother its most prominent rival and the largest manufacturer of Android smartphones and to intimidate mobile phone carriers under an avalanche of meritless, rapidly evolving legal threats, rather than fairly competing in the marketplace,” according to the motion authored by Samsung attorney Victoria Maroulis with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan.
The San Francisco firm also argued that Apple’s three antitrust and competition counterclaims do not state a legal claim, and that Apple’s declaratory-judgment counterclaims do not serve any purpose.
Apple’s opposition brief reiterates its claims that Samsung violated the rules of standard-setting organizations by hiding its intellectual property rights at the same time it was “aggressively lobbying” the Electronic Telecommunications Standards Institute. The institute is a standard-setting organization that works to establish specified electronic communication technologies with industry members.
“Apple’s counterclaims squarely address Samsung’s serial standard-setting abuses that inflict continuing harm on consumers, competition, and Apple alike,” Apple attorney Mark Selwyn wrote.
Apple, calling itself the “quintessential antitrust plaintiff,” said it sufficiently argued that Samsung has acted in an anticompetitive manner and that the company has a monopoly.
If the standard-setting organization knew about Samsung’s deception, it would have either picked different technology to standardize or refused to standardize Samsung’s intellectual property rights, according to the 28-page filing.
Apple also opposed Samsung’s motion to strike its declaratory judgment claims. Without the claims, “Apple risks not obtaining rulings in connection with its active dispute with Samsung,” said Selwyn, an attorney with Palo Alto-based Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.
“For example, if Samsung withdraws its counterclaims (it has already withdrawn its original complaint) or the counterclaims are otherwise never tried, the Court will not reach Apple’s affirmative defenses,” he added (parentheses in original).
Apple asked U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose to deny Samsung’s motion to dismiss and motion to strike its counterclaims.
Earlier this month, courts in Germany and the Netherlands barred Samsung from selling the Galaxy tablet and phones in the European Union.
- Cryer’s Ex-Wife Can Keep Child Support, Not Child
- Google Defends Against Oracle Copyright Case