Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Apple Tells Supreme Court It Shouldn’t Bother Hearing Samsung’s Appeal

“While this litigation may be high-profile, it is legally unexceptional, and Samsung has shown no reason for this Court to prolong it.”

Ina Fried

Apple filed its arguments to the Supreme Court Thursday, not surprisingly telling the nation’s highest court that there is no reason for it to take up Samsung’s appeal in the long-running patent dispute.

Samsung made its case in a December filing that the court could help settle a range of issues around design patents, particularly how damages are calculated. Google and Facebook also filed arguments encouraging the court to hear Samsung’s appeal.

Samsung has already paid Apple $548 million in the case, but says the legal principles at stake demand that it continue to fight the jury verdict, which was upheld by the Federal Circuit appeals court. Samsung was found to infringe on both design and utility patents related to the iPhone, though Samsung’s appeal focuses on the design patent portion of the verdict.

In its filing on Thursday, Apple argued that the method for awarding damages in design patents is a settled issue and not worthy of Supreme Court review.

“Samsung had its day in court — many days, in fact — and the properly instructed jury was well-justified in finding that Samsung copied Apple’s designs and should pay the damages that the statute expressly authorizes,” Apple said on Thursday. “While this litigation may be high-profile, it is legally unexceptional, and Samsung has shown no reason for this Court to prolong it.”

Samsung, responded to Apple’s filing, by pointing to the tech companies on its side: “If the legal precedent in this case stands, innovation could be diminished, competition could be stifled, and opportunistic lawsuits could have negative effects throughout the U.S. economy,” it said in a statement.

Apple’s full argument is here, while Samsung’s can be found here.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Anthropic just made AI scarierAnthropic just made AI scarier
Podcast
Podcasts

Why the company’s new AI model is a cybersecurity nightmare.

By Dustin DeSoto and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
The Supreme Court will decide when the police can use your phone to track youThe Supreme Court will decide when the police can use your phone to track you
Politics

Chatrie v. United States asks what limits the Constitution places on the surveillance state in an age of cellphones.

By Ian Millhiser
Future Perfect
The simple question that could change your careerThe simple question that could change your career
Future Perfect

Making a difference in the world doesn’t require changing your job.

By Bryan Walsh
Technology
The case for AI realismThe case for AI realism
Technology

AI isn’t going to be the end of the world — no matter what this documentary sometimes argues.

By Shayna Korol
Politics
OpenAI’s oddly socialist, wildly hypocritical new economic agendaOpenAI’s oddly socialist, wildly hypocritical new economic agenda
Politics

The AI company released a set of highly progressive policy ideas. There’s just one small problem.

By Eric Levitz
Future Perfect
Human bodies aren’t ready to travel to Mars. Space medicine can help.Human bodies aren’t ready to travel to Mars. Space medicine can help.
Future Perfect

Protecting astronauts in space — and maybe even Mars — will help transform health on Earth.

By Shayna Korol