Kevin Bostic
Ahead of an expected final decision in the coming months, the International Trade Commission will take another look at a decision by one of its judges that found Samsung had infringed one Apple patent but not another.
A figure from Apple's U.S. Patent No. RE41,922
A specialist trade panel will take a look at one ITC judge's split decision, the Commission revealed on Tuesday, according to Reuters. The ITC will render a final decision on the case — No. 337-796 — on August 1.
In April, an ITC judge ruled that Samsung had infringed an Apple patent on a text selection feature in both its smartphones and tablets. That patent was U.S. Patent No. RE41,922, covering "a method and apparatus for providing translucent images on a computer display," and the judge found that the text selection feature in the stock Android Browser application and the translucent buttons of the Android photo gallery were infringing.
In the same decision, though, the judge found that Samsung had not infringed on a second Apple patent, one covering a means for a device to tell whether a microphone or other attachment is plugged into its microphone jack.
Case 337-796 has been ongoing since 2011, when Apple accused Samsung's Galaxy, Transform, and Nexus devices of infringing Apple patents.
Christine McKee
Stephen Silver
Charles Martin
Amber Neely
5 Comments
Sigh. This stuff just takes forever.
The legal system in the US has truly become quite lame in rendering speedy justice. And not too many lawyers, judges, and regulators seem to care. Pathetic.
Sigh. This stuff just takes forever.
The legal system in the US has truly become quite lame in rendering speedy justice. And not too many lawyers, judges, and regulators seem to care. Pathetic.
Why would they object to a situation that creates job opportunities for them ?
Sigh. This stuff just takes forever.
The legal system in the US has truly become quite lame in rendering speedy justice. And not too many lawyers, judges, and regulators seem to care. Pathetic.
Legal "justice" takes a long, long time and is typically very expensive.
Sigh. This stuff just takes forever.
The ironic thing is that the ITC used to be considered to be the fast path!
That aside, it's sad that they didn't just declare the patent invalid. It's for having one translucent window on top of another, with one or the other window taking input. Seriously, USPTO?
Forget examiners, judges and juries. There should be an engineer peer review panel.
The law and possibly the administration of the law needs to be changed. Might need more money to support these courts too. I think we need ideas on how to better change it rather than blaming judges and lawyers. Not that there's anything wrong with that :D