Apple, Samsung Spar in Third Spat for Damages

     SAN JOSE, Calif. (CN) – Apple and Samsung tussled over the admissibility of certain evidence ahead of yet another trial on damages from a three-year-old jury verdict, currently slated to begin March 28.
     U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh listened to arguments in advance of the third trial in the tech giants’ five-year patent battle – and the fatigue was palpable.
     “We’ve done this trial three times, so I am hoping you can advance these deadlines a little more,” Koh said, while the two sides wrangled over how many demonstration slides will be used during opening and closing arguments.
     In the first case, a jury awarded Apple $1 billion in damages in 2012, finding Samsung had violated Apple’s patents to produce its line of Galaxy smartphones and tablets. Koh halved that award the following year, faulting the jury for not following her instructions in the 22-page, 700-question verdict form, and ordered a retrial on related damages.
     The second jury awarded Apple $290 million. The Federal Circuit ruled in May 2015 that the trade dress claims, which relate to how the visual appearance of a product signifies a specific product to consumers, were not subject to intellectual property rights protections and upheld the remainder of the verdict.
     On Thursday, Samsung argued three pieces of evidence should be withheld from the impending trial because they’re irrelevant to the case as it stands now.
     First, Samsung asked the court to bar Apple from presenting a chart that demonstrated Samsung’s market share data in 2010, when Samsung infringed some of Apple’s patents. Samsung argued that the five products at issue in the present case only accounted for 17 percent of the market share, and allowing the data to be presented could mislead a jury and lead to unfair compensation.
     Samsung argued the chart has little relevance to the case now, given the Federal Circuit vacated trade dress claims relating to five of the original 26 products involved in the 2012 case.
     Apple argued the chart was relevant for a jury to establish damages, and that allowing Samsung to revisit certain pieces of evidence was akin to opening a “Pandora’s box” of issues for relitigation.
     Samsung also asked to bar expert testimony and keep out evidence of its $3.5 billion profit during the disputed period, arguing that the inclusion of such evidence would unfairly prejudice a jury against Samsung and was not relevant to the issue at hand.
     Apple argued the evidence is crucial in helping a jury ascertain appropriate damages.
     Koh adjourned the hearing without making a decision.
     Apple lawyers deferred to the company’s public relations department, which did not return a voicemail seeking comment.
     Samsung spokeswoman Danielle Cohen declined to comment on the hearing.

%d bloggers like this: