Judge reduces damages awarded to Apple in Apple vs Samsung trial from $1.05 billion to $598 million, plus orders a new trial


Apple is having what can best be described as a crappy week. First they are forced to pay $368 million to a patent troll. Then they are taunted by Samsung vis-a-vis Samsung’s lawyers hiring the UK judge that ruled against Apple. Now they are at the receiving end of judge by an American judge.

In what can be regarded as a semi coup d’état by Samsung, Judge Lucy Koh — the judge that presided over the much-publicized Apple vs Samsung trial last year — has finished processing post-trial motions and has come up with a decision: the original $1.049 billion in damages awarded to Apple by the jury is to be cut down to $598.9 million and a new trial is to take place to determine how much, if any, of the remaining $450.1 million ($1.049 billion minus $598.9 million) Samsung should be forced to pay Apple.

Judge Koh has based her ruling on two errors of the jury:

  • Firstly, she determined that the jury improperly used Samsung’s profits to determine damages caused by Samsung’s infringement on Apple’s utility patents. Legally speaking, juries can use the profits of infringing company to determine damages only when design patents have been infringed.
  • Secondly, Judge Koh ruled that the jury used the wrong period of time to calculate damages Samsung should pay to Apple. According to Judge Koh, damages should have been calculated from April 15, 2011 and the jury calculated damages from a date prior to that.

Judge Koh described the above mentioned errors as “an impermissible legal theory on which the jury based its award”.

Of course all isn’t lost for Apple. Judge Koh has refused Samsung’s request to overturn the jury’s decision that Samsung infringed on Apple’s patents — she has just revised the damages, meaning legally Samsung is still guilty of infringement of the relevant patents — and, after all, Apple is still going to get almost $600 million out of Samsung (assuming an appeals court doesn’t overturn it all). Plus Judge Koh has agreed with Apple that Apple is due damages for sale of Samsung’s infringing products that took place after the conclusion of the trial. However, most people will see this as a win for Samsung.

BOOM. Do you hear that? It is the sound of Cupertino’s house of billion dollar cards falling down, one golden brick at a time.

[via The Verge, image via iwolkow]

Related Posts

  • Ashraf

    [@thegreenwizard] Erm, my bad. I picked it cause I couldn’t find anything else. I figured you know, Apple is most valuable tech company, lion is king of the jungle, lion crying, Apple crying… yeah okay, bad idea. Sorry!

    [@Chuck] You are misunderstanding. The judge explicitly denied to overrule the jury. The judge simply corrected the jury’s errors; they inappropriately calculated damages, i.e. they did not calculate what the law allows.

    [@Mike] Touche, Mike, touche.

  • Mike

    @Ashraf: “It is the sound of Cupertino’s house of billion dollar cards falling down, one golden brick at a time.” If only you or I could have such a falling house of cards, currently at $598.9 million and likely to increase substantially when a jury recalculates the remainder.


  • Mike

    [@Chuck] The judge overruled the portion of the jury’s decision that flatly had been miscalculated–exactly what a judge is supposed to do, in our system of checks and balances. And now a jury simply will (correctly) recalculate what, if anything, should be awarded of the remaining amount.

  • chuck

    [@thegreenwizard] Agreed with the rotten apple
    Maybe it depicts just how tired the courts/Judges are?

  • thegreenwizard

    Just a question about the picture: Why this picture?
    This is the monument for all the Swiss mercenaries who died to the service of the French Kingdom, it is in Luzern, Switzerland.

    I don’t see the relation, a rotten apple would have be better.

  • Chuck

    What’s the point of a jury if their decisions are going to be over-ruled by the Judge?
    Were they “improperly instructed” regarding the criteria on which to reach their conclusions?
    No matter,I personally hope Apple gets it’s @ss handed to it in every litigation from now til the end of time.
    They are proven thieves of intellectual property,and their logo should be used as the universal symbol for price gouging.
    Oh,look,big Apple sale-Save $100 off our new $2600 Crapbook Pro.Or how about the new Mini-$329-couldn’t bring it in at $299-no sir,gotta jam it up your @ss for an extra 30 bucks.They just suck!! End rant.Thank you