Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.

Good Law

67 F. Supp. 3d 1100·2014 WL 4443407·113 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1040·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127972

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 8, 2014Case No.: 12-CV-00630-LHKCalifornia16,883 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koh, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART APPLE’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW •

[PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION]

On May 5, 2014, after a thirteen-day trial and approximately four days of deliberation, a jury in this patent case reached a verdict. ECF No. 1884. On May 23, 2014, Apple filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, amended judgment, new trial, and damages enhancements. ECF No. 1897-3 (“Mot.”). On June 6, 2014, Samsung filed an opposition. ECF No. 1906 (“Opp’n”). On June 13, 2014, Apple filed a reply. ECF No. 1919 (“Reply”). The Court held a hearing on the post-trial motions on July 10, 2014. Having considered the law, the record, and the parties’ arguments, the Court GRANTS Apple’s request for judgment as a matter of law of non-infringement of claim 15 of the '239 patent with respect to Apple’s iPad products, GRANTS Apple’s request for supplemental damages and prejudgment interest, and DENIES Apple’s motion for judgment as a matter of law in all other respects.

I. LEGAL STANDARD

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 permits a district court to grant judgment as a matter of law “when the evidence permits only one reasonable conclusion and the conclusion is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.