• Apple vs. Samsung Set to Look Over 53 Pages of Instructions to Prepare Trial Verdict



    On the last day of testimony in the Apple vs. Samsung patent trial, Samsung counsel and its final expert witness were berated by the presiding Judge Lucy Koh over possible coaching on what to say based on claim construction of a contentious Apple patent. The two tech giants met in court recently to hash out the definition of a claim relating to Apple’s ‘647 patent covering data detectors. Specifically, Apple’s definition of “analyzer servers” as presented in Apple vs. Samsung differs from a ruling handed down by the Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit last week that overturned the dismissal of a separate action involving Apple and Motorola.

    In its recent ruling, the CAFC sided with Judge Richard A. Posner’s interpretation of analyzer servers, not Apple’s version as argued in the trial against Samsung. Since Judge Koh allowed Apple to assert the patent and its claim construction, she granted both parties an hour of time and one witness each to clarify the patent in an extension to proceedings.

    The Cupertino California recalled Carnegie Mellon professor Todd Mowry to testify that Samsung is still in infringement of Apple’s “quick links” patent even with Judge Posner’s interpretation according to CNET. To counter, Samsung recalled University of North Carolina professor Kevin Jeffay. In his testimony, Jeffay mentioned he held a particular interpretation of the analyzer server, one incongruent with Apple’s definition, but claimed the court ordered him not to discuss it. Judge Koh wasn’t pleased with this.

    According to tweets from mLex correspondent Mike Swift, the jurist didn’t appreciate “that Samsung ‘prepped’ Jeffay to say he was blocked from using correct construction.” Judge Koh struck his statements from the record, adding that the expert’s deposition was “very inconsistent.”

    The South Korean tech giant was charged for the time, limiting Jeffay’s testimony to a non-infringement argument based largely on prior art in the form of Borland’s Sidekick software which was originally launched on MS-DOS in 1984. Apple and Samsung was set to present closing arguments today after which jurors would deliberate and render a verdict as per a 53-page set of finalized instructions handed out earlier.

    Source: CNET
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Apple vs. Samsung Set to Look Over 53 Pages of Instructions to Prepare Trial Verdict started by Akshay Masand View original post
  • Connect With Us

  • Twitter Box

  • Facebook