Roger Fingas
Samsung has asked the US Patent and Trademark Office to review two Smartflash patents, a move that could potentially absolve Apple of paying $532.9 million in damages following a Smartflash court victory in February.
Like Apple, Samsung is facing a Smartflash lawsuit over patents connected to data storage and payment systems, which in Apple's case brought iAd, iOS, the iTunes Store, and the Mac and iOS App Stores under scrutiny. Samsung is asking the USPTO to determine whether or not two of the patents are invalid, Bloomberg said on Friday.
Earlier this week a patent agency review board issued preliminary findings against the patents, contending that they cover abstract concepts instead of definite inventions. Their fate will ultimately be decided by a panel of judges hearing arguments from both Samsung and Smartflash.
The latter is likely to lose out in the decision. Last year the US Supreme Court ruled that simply having a computer perform a business function doesn't constitute a new invention, which in tandem with this week's preliminary review may set a clear precedent.
Should the case not be dimissed or settled beforehand, Samsung is facing an August trial date. In all the USPTO is reviewing five out of six patents being wielded in the Smartflash lawsuits — a Samsung petition to invalidate the third patent in Apple's case is awaiting action.
Apple is in the process of appealing the February verdict. It may need to stretch out proceedings, however, if it wants to wait for the USPTO ruling to be handed down.
Charles Martin
Christine McKee
Malcolm Owen
Sponsored Content
Amber Neely
7 Comments
Q: Why did Samsung request the patent review instead of Apple?
A: In its agreement to supply Apple with flash storage, Samsung may have also agreed to indemnify Apple for any liability over patent infringement.
[quote name="Cpsro" url="/t/185582/samsung-patent-review-may-undermine-533m-smartflash-verdict-against-apple#post_2703641"]Q: Why did Samsung request the patent review instead of Apple? A: In its agreement to supply Apple with flash storage, Samsung may have also agreed to indemnify Apple for any liability over patent infringement. [/quote] Samsung is being sued. As for Samsung indemnifying Apple I don't why. The supposedly offending Apple features are related to payment systems so at least some if not all of the patent claims are not specific to basic flash functions.
Q: Why did Samsung request the patent review instead of Apple?
A: In its agreement to supply Apple with flash storage, Samsung may have also agreed to indemnify Apple for any liability over patent infringement.
"Samsung didn’t file the petitions to save Apple -- its own fight with Smartflash is scheduled for an August trial in Tyler, Texas, though Samsung may ask that it be put off until the patent office completes the reviews. In the suit, Tyler-based Smartflash claims Samsung’s Media Hub uses the technology without paying royalties."
"In all, six Smartflash patents were asserted against both Apple and Samsung. The patent office has already agreed to review five of them. Some were based on Apple petitions, and the most recent on Samsung petitions. A Samsung petition to invalidate the third patent involved in the Apple case is still pending."
it's all in there.
My enemy's enemy is my friend! Did not see that comming
Q: Why did Samsung request the patent review instead of Apple?
A: In its agreement to supply Apple with flash storage, Samsung may have also agreed to indemnify Apple for any liability over patent infringement.
Flash storage chips/memory have nothing to do with the patent issues.