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

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Patent Infringement Litigation Before the U.S. International Trade Commission By Timothy DeWitt 24IP Law Group USA 12 E. Lake Dr. Annapolis, MD
Advertisements

Ch. 18 Guided Reading and Review answers
PATENT PRACTICE and LTIGATION IN JAPAN OHNO & PARTNERS Attorney-at-law admitted in JAPAN and N.Y.
Trademark enforcement in Belarus AIPPI Baltic, Vilnius, 2013 Darya Lando, Head of Legal Department LexPatent, Minsk, Belarus.
THE DYNAMICS OF JUROR SELECTION IN PATENT LITIGATION HOUSTON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INN OF COURT Pupillage Groups 3 & 4 March 28, 2013.
Lady Gaga and Misgivings of the JPO? Dr. Shoichi Okuyama AIPPI Japan Okuyama & Sasajima.
Comparison between JP & US new patent systems - First (inventor) to file, exception to loss of novelty, and grace period - NOBUTAKA YOKOTA KYOWA PATENT.
By David W. Hill AIPLA Immediate Past President Partner Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Overview of the America Invents Act.
1 “Self Cooking” Service in Japan through Tokyo District Court’s decision of September 30, 2013 AIPLA MWI IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Wednesday,
Practice of IP High Court in Infringement Cases involving Doctrine of Equivalents April 19, 2012 Intellectual Property High Court Judge, Hideko Takemiya.
© Kolisch Hartwell 2013 All Rights Reserved, Page 1 America Invents Act (AIA) Implementation in 2012 Peter D. Sabido Intellectual Property Attorney Kolisch.
How to Brief a Case Hawkins v. McGee.
USDA Imagery Planning & Coordination Meeting MAPPS Lawsuit Overview Geoff Gabbott USDA, FSA, Aerial Photography Field Office.
The Process of Litigation. What is the first stage in a civil lawsuit ?  Service of Process (the summons)
© 2005 Morrison & Foerster LLP All Rights Reserved Offense as Defense in U.S. Patent Litigation Anthony L. Press Maximizing IP Seminar October 31, 2005.
Greg Gardella Patent Reexamination: Effective Strategy for Litigating Infringement Claims Best Practices for Pursuing and Defending Parallel Proceedings.
Speeding It Up at the USPTO July 2013 July 23, 2013.
JEOPARDY #1 - Ch. 16. PARTY TIME Just In Case Principle Things TermsJurisdictionWho’s Who
Judicial Protection of Patent Rights in China --If Apple Sued Samsung in China, What would be the Remedies ? ZHANG Guangliang Renmin University of China.
IPR Litigation System & Recent Case in Korea Hee-Young JEONG Judge of Daejeon District Court, KOREA April 22, 2015.
AIPLA Annual Meeting 2014 Bifurcation before the UPC Dr. Jochen Pagenberg Attorney-at-law, Munich/Paris Past President EPLAW Prinzregentenplatz
Objective 1.02 Understand Court Systems and Trial Procedures
1 FRAND defense in Japan through Tokyo District Court’s decision of February 28, 2013, and IP High Court’s invitation of “Amicus Brief” of January 23,
1 Remedies for True Owner of Right to Obtain Patent against Usurped Patent AIPLA MWI IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Sunday, January 22, 2012.
Unit A-Business Law Essential Standard 1.00
Patent Litigaton Strategies in Israel Reuven Behar, partner Fischer Behar Chen & Co.
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Japan - with a particular reference to Australian Judgments - Koji Takahashi Doshisha University Law.
Patenting Wireless Technology: Infringement and Invalidity Dr. Tal Lavian UC Berkeley Engineering,
COURT CASES. There are two types of court cases: 1. Criminal: A case where someone is accused of breaking the law 2. Civil: A disagreement between two.
Civil Law Resolutions to disputes between people..
Chapter 18: The Federal Court System
2011 Japanese Patent Law Revision AIPLA Annual Meeting October 21, 2011 Yoshi Inaba TMI Associates.
Court Procedures Chapter 3.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association EMERGING TRENDS IN INTER PARTES REVIEW PRACTICE TOM ENGELLENNER Pepper Hamilton, LLP.
Post-Grant & Inter Partes Review Procedures Presented to AIPPI, Italy February 10, 2012 By Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin & Szipl, P.C.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association The Presumption of Patent Validity in the U.S. Tom Engellenner AIPLA Presentation to.
Chapter 10: The Judicial Branch
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
Revisions to Japanese Patent Law Before the law was revised, a Divisional Applications could not be filed after a Notice of Allowance 2.
Structure of the Federal Court System
DATE POWER 2 INCOME JANUARY 100member X 25.00P2, FEBRUARY 200member X 25.00P5, MARCH 400member X 25.00P10, APRIL 800member.
Types of Federal Courts The Constitution created only the Supreme Court, giving Congress the power to create any lower, or “inferior,” courts as needed.
1 Working the IP Case Steve Baron Sept. 3, Today’s Agenda  Anatomy of an IP case  The Courts and the Law  Links to finding cases  Parts of.
Chris Fildes FILDES & OUTLAND, P.C. IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting AIPLA Annual Meeting, October 20, 2015 USPTO PILOT PROGRAMS 1 © AIPLA 2015.
False Announcements of Patent Infringement Dr. Shoichi Okuyama Vice President, AIPPI Japan October 20/21, 2015 Pre-meeting, AIPLA Annual Meeting.
Supreme Court Decision on Enforceability of a US Court Decision Dr. Shoichi Okuyama AIPPI Japan AIPLA Pre-meeting on October 22, 2014.
 The United States has an adversarial court system. › This means that two opposing sides must argue their cases before a judge in order to find the truth.
Trends Relating to Patent Infringement Litigation in JAPAN
Chapter 10 The Judicial Branch Complete warm-up Define following words: PlaintiffDefendant ProsecutionPrecedent Original jurisdictionAppeal.
© 2007 Sidley Austin LLP, Los Angeles, CA All rights reserved. What is a Civil Case?
Recent Japanese Cases Regarding Standard Essential Patents and FRAND Licensing Declaration AIPLA-IPHC Meeting April 11, 2013 Shinji ODA Judge, Intellectual.
Inventive Step in Japan and my personal reflection Dr. Shoichi Okuyama Okuyama & Sasajima AIPPI Japan January 2015 Orlando, Florida 1.
Maintenance of patented products Dr. Shoichi Okuyama Vice President, AIPPI Japan January 27-28, 2016 Pre-meeting, AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute.
Presentation Pro © 2001 by Prentice Hall, Inc. Magruder’s American Government C H A P T E R 18 The Federal Court System.
The Court System Chapter 5. Courts  Trial Courts- two parties Plaintiff- in civil trial is the person bringing the legal action Prosecutor- in criminal.
Creative Technology vs. Apple Computer Zach Duff IEOR 190G November 3, 2008.
The Courts AP US Government. Some Basic Legal Terms Litigant – Someone involved in a lawsuit. This includes both plaintiff (one bringing the charge) and.
The Judicial Branch “The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from.
1 How To Find and Read the Law and Live to Tell (and Talk) About It Steve Baron January 29, 2009.
The Applicability of Patent-Agent Privilege After In re Queen’s University at Kingston Presented by Rachel Perry © 2016 Workman Nydegger.
Kei IIDA Attorney at Law & Patent Attorney Nakamura & Partners
Pretrial Conference After discovery, a pretrial hearing is held to clarify the issues, consider a settlement, and set rules for trial Once the trial court.
Civil Cases.
How To Find and Read the Law and Live to Tell (and Talk) About It
Samsung vs. Apple, Inc. First US trial verdict – Aug 24, 2012
The Court System Appeals.
The Role of the Judicial Branch (courts)
The Courts AP US Government.
2015 January February March April May June July August September
Presentation transcript:

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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)

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

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