U.S. ITC judge wants Samsung to post a bond of 88% of its U.S. smartphone sales due to Apple patent case

“An October 24, 2012 preliminary ruling that held Samsung to infringe four Apple patents could have more drastic consequences for Samsung’s U.S. business than previously known,” FLorian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents. “If the U.S. trade agency affirms the judge’s findings of violations (which the ITC staff supports across the board) and adopts his recommended remedies, Samsung faces the following draconian combination of sanctions.”

a U.S. import ban that would enter into effect after the 60-day Presidential review period following a final ITC decision,

a simultaneous cease-and-desist order that would prohibit the sale of any commercially significant quantities of the imported infringing accused products in the United States (this remedy was denied against HTC), and

the requirement to post a bond of 88% of the value of all mobile phones, 32.5% of the value of all media players, and 37.6% of the value of all tablet computers found to infringe Apple’s patents-in-suit during the Presidential review period.

Much more in the full article here.

FTC slams Google for seeking ban of Apple iPhones, iPads

“The Federal Trade Commission is backing Apple in the company's battle with Google over standard-essential patents (SEP), arguing that any attempt to ban a product for allegedly infringing an SEP ‘risks harming competition, innovation, and consumers,’” John Paczkowski reports for AllThingsD.

“The patents Motorola had attempted to assert against Apple were SEPs, which it is obligated to license on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms,” Paczkowski reports. “And in the FTC's eyes, using the threat of SEP-based injunctions to demand higher royalties or other favorable licensing terms is bad business. It's a ‘patent hold-up,’ to quote the agency's term.”

Paczkowski reports, “It's worth noting that this isn't the first time the FTC has sounded off on SEP-driven lawsuits and Google's efforts to use them to enhance its negotiating stance. Back in June, the agency told the Federal Trade Commission that Google's request for import bans against Microsoft's Xbox and Apple's iPhone for their alleged infringement of its SEPs could hurt competition.”

Read more in the full article here.

Apple seeks to add Samsung’s Galaxy Note, Google’s Android 4.1 Jelly Bean to patent infringement lawsuit

“Apple Inc. told a judge that Samsung Electronics Co.'s Galaxy Note 10.1 device infringes its patents, and sought to add the Android 4.1 Jelly Bean operating system to an existing lawsuit against Samsung in California,” Joel Rosenblatt and Pam MacLean report for Bloomberg.

“Apple made the arguments today to U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal in federal court in San Jose,” Rosenblatt and MacLean report. “Apple's bid to expand the lawsuit follows Samsung's Oct. 1 move to add patent- infringement claims against the iPhone 5 in the same case. Apple won a $1.05 billion jury verdict against Samsung on Aug. 24 in a separate patent case in the same court.”

Rosenblatt and MacLean report, “The case in which Apple added the Galaxy Note 10.1 and Jelly Bean operating system is scheduled for trial in 2014.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: 2014. The legal system is so efficient as to render itself useless.

They got O.J. more quickly.

Apple Looking to Patent a Universal Connector

Just when we were starting to get used to the new Lightning connector, Apple files a patent with the United States Patent Office that indicates the company is thinking about a universal connector that would do away with the need for various adapters and limit the number types of ports any single device would need.

From the filing:

Customer confusion may also result as users try to sort through a bewildering array of acronyms. Design complexity may also be increased. For example, to avoid damage, each new connector may be constructed such that a connector insert from a cable that supports one interface cannot be improperly inserted into a connector receptacle for another interface.

Also, as these standards and interfaces evolve, devices with newer connectors may not be compatible with a user’s legacy components. For example, a new computer may have an HDMI connector, while a monitor may have a DVI connector. An adapter to convert signals from HDMI to DVI may be used, but such necessity invokes further customer dissatisfaction.

The new device would feature a design flexible enough to be used by a variety of peripherals, by including “a number of relatively small pads or contacts arranged in an array or other pattern.” This series of pads could be configured to supply ground, power, or signal lines to every and any Apple device you own (without changing shape and therefore requiring new cables and new receptacles).

While this concept may fly in the face of capitalism and eliminate what must be a considerable revenue stream for Apple (selling cables and adapters and accessories, oh my!), it fits their business model much more closely: keeping products simple, streamlined and easy to support.

Would you be upset if Apple released yet another dock connector if it was as universal and multi-purpose/multi-device as this universal connector promises it could be?

Apple calls Samsung’s allegation of jury misconduct ‘frivolous on its face’

“Late on Tuesday, Apple filed a first response to Samsung’s allegations of jury misconduct,” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents.

“Apple does not oppose Samsung’s motion to seal all of its related accusations but wonders why Samsung brings such a motion after it ‘failed to redact enough material from its jury misconduct motion and supporting papers to keep the substance of its allegations secret,’ a failure that enabled the media to identify that Samsung’s attacks target jury foreman Velvin Hogan,” Mueller reports. “What Apple does oppose is Samsung’s request that the parties be barred from contacting members of the jury. That request doesn’t make sense to Apple given that the media would still be free to talk to any of the jurors, and in light of the willingness of several jurors to give interviews.

Mueller writes, “What I like about Apple’s motion is that Apple is at the same mindful of the jurors’ privacy and not at all afraid to discuss in public what needs to be addressed because of Samsung’s initiative. I continue to be very skeptical of Samsung’s chances of winning a new trial on the grounds of misconduct.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related article:
Samsung asks for new trial in patent dispute with Apple – September 25, 2012

A lawyer’s take on Apple v. Samsung (with video)

The media has been closely watching the Apple vs. Samsung case and so have the lawyers.

This morning's Apple and Samsung patent trial proceedings began with 84 “jury instructions,” which tell the jurors how to apply the law while they deliberate and the day is planned to end with closing arguments from both Apple’s and Samsung’s lawyers.

Intellectual property attorney Bill Panagos of Butzel Long in Detroit joins The Wall Street Journal‘s “Digits” show to discuss what the legal community has their eye on.