Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Apple v. Samsung in Japan Tampa, Florida January 2013 Dr. Shoichi Okuyama President Japan Patent Attorneys Association.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Apple v. Samsung in Japan Tampa, Florida January 2013 Dr. Shoichi Okuyama President Japan Patent Attorneys Association."— Presentation transcript:

1 Apple v. Samsung in Japan Tampa, Florida January 2013 Dr. Shoichi Okuyama President Japan Patent Attorneys Association

2 According to News Reports Apple filed two lawsuits on the merit against Samsung ▫Synchronization patent (No ) ▫Bounce scroll patent (No ) Apple also filed lawsuits for preliminary injunction orders Samsung sued Apple for a preliminary injunction order The above are all patent cases, no designs involved

3 Case 1: Synchronization patent case Filed around July 2011 and decided on August 31, 2012 Plaintiff: Apple Inc. Defendants: Samsung Japan, et al. Apple asserted indirect infringement on synchronization patent No ▫which claims the earliest priority date of October 22, 2001 ▫and corresponds to USP and USP , but claims are very different from those in Japan ▫The invention is to synchronize data in a media player with those of a host PC.

4 Synchronization patent case Accused products are new models ▫Galaxy S SC-02B; SII SC-02C; S II LTE SC-01D, etc ▫Galaxy Tab SC-01C; 10.1 LTE SC-01D, etc.  LTE SC-01D first sold in October 2011 in Japan ▫Galaxy Note SC-05D  First sold in Japan in April 2012 But, in fact, synchronization software “Kies” is the real target Asked for damages only, no injunction No argument of invalidity

5 Court proceedings First formal hearing on September 7, 2011 Six informal and closed meetings ▫Complaint ▫Answer ▫Twelve briefs plus two motions from plaintiff ▫Eight briefs from defendant Final formal hearing on June 22, 2012 Decision was handed down on August 31, 2012

6 Arguments The patented method requires matching of at least three items: title, artist name, and “quality characteristic” between the media player and host PC, and Apple tried a broader interpretation of claim language ▫Apple did not argue for DOE infringement Defendant argued that Kies uses file name and file size for synchronization, and even if the title, for example, does not match, synchronization will be done The court accepted the defendant’s argument

7 Case 2: Bounce scroll patent lawsuit Filed on August 23, 2011 ▫First formal hearing on October 12, 2011 ▫Nine hearings so far and the next one will be March 14 Plaintiff: Apple Inc. Defendants: Samsung Japan, et al. Plaintiff asked for damages only, no injunction order JP patent No (granted May 2011), filed as a PCT application (WO2008/086218) claiming multiple priorities from 2007 ▫Has 720 family members (Delphion) ▫Corresponds to USP according to Apple in a brief filed in Japan ▫JP claims are similar to US claims The patent is currently subject to invalidation proceedings before the JPO filed by Samsung Electronics in May 2012 ▫Reply brief was submitted in September 2012 (no further substantive events)

8 Invention and products The invention is how the moving image on a display bounces when an end of a list of times hits the edge of the display – bounce scroll Claims 19, 55 and 69 of JP No ▫Claims directed to products Allegedly infringing products ▫Galaxy S SC-02B ▫Galaxy Tab SC-01C ▫Galaxy S II SC-02C

9 Prospect Tokyo District Court may hand down a decision soon ▫Civil 29 th Division, Judge Shigeru Osuga presiding ▫The Tokyo District Court has not finished the infringement stage, and has not gone into the damages stage. ▫Since the petition for invalidation was filed with JPO, the court held three hearings and another is coming March JPO may take a while to come up with a decision ▫Two parties being foreign, it may take more time

10


Download ppt "Apple v. Samsung in Japan Tampa, Florida January 2013 Dr. Shoichi Okuyama President Japan Patent Attorneys Association."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google