decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Apple Files Notice of Appeal to Federal Circuit Re Denial of Injunction Against Samsung ~pj
Thursday, December 20 2012 @ 06:50 PM EST

Apple has already filed a notice of appeal of the denial of a permanent injunction against Samsung:
2203 - Filed & Entered: 12/20/2012
NOTICE OF APPEAL to the Federal Circuit as to [2197] Order by Apple Inc.. Filing fee $ 455, receipt number 0971-7360492. Appeal Record due by 1/22/2013. (Selwyn, Mark) (Filed on 12/20/2012)
And we have more transcripts from the trial as PDFs for you, days 6-11, and we'll be working on text versions for you. If you would like to help with that, feel free to leave a comment as to which one you will work on. I'm almost done with day 6, so pick another one, please.

Here are the transcripts of the trial as PDFs, which I'll write about in detail as we post the text versions, day by day, but I thought you might like them as soon as we have them:
  • Day 6, Aug. 10 - Apple witnesses: Hal Poret, Kent Van Liere, Ravin Balakrishnan, Karan Singh, John Hauser, Boris Teksler.

  • Day 7, Aug. 13 - Apple witness: Brian Teksler. Samsung witnesses: Jun Won Lee (by videotaped deposition), Dong Hoon Chang (by video deposition), Timothy Benner (by videotaped deposition), Timothy Sheppard (by videotaped deposition), Terry Musika. (This is the day Apple rested and Samsung began putting on its case.)

  • Day 8, Aug. 14 - Samsung witnesses: Clifton Forlines, Woodward Yang, Jinyeun Wang, Roger Fidler (by video deposition), Itay Sherman.

  • Day 9, Aug. 15 - Samsung witnesses: Markus Paltian (by video deposition), Andre Zorn (by video deposition), Tim Arthur Williams, Jin Soo Kim, Richard Howarth, Andries Van Dam, Stephen Gray.

  • Day 10, Aug. 16 - Samsung witnesses: Timothy Sheppard, Michael Wagner, Ramamirtham Sukumar, Vincent O'Brien, David Teece. Apple rebuttal witnesses: Tony Blevins, Emilie Kim, Paul Dourish, Tony Givargis, Mani Srivastava, Hyong Kim.

  • Day 11, Aug. 17 - Apple rebuttal witnesses: Hyong Kim, Edward Knightly, Susan Kare, Michael Walker, Richard Donaldson, Seung-Ho Ahn (video deposition), Jun Won Lee (video deposition), Janusz Ordover, Peter Bressler, Karan Singh, Ravin Balakrishnan. Samsung's surrebuttal witnesses: David Teece, Tim Williams, Woodward Yang.

Here's the wording of the Notice of Appeal:

NOTICE IS GIVEN that Plaintiff Apple Inc. appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from the Order Denying Motion for Permanent Injunction entered in this action on December 17, 2012 (Dkt. 2197) and from all other orders, rulings, findings, and conclusions underlying and related to that order.
And here's the rest of the docket of Apple v. Samsung:

12/18/2012 - 2199 - ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1782 GRANTING LEAVE TO OBTAIN DISCOVERY FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS by Judge Paul S. Grewal, granting 2196 Stipulation. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2012) (Entered: 12/18/2012)

12/18/2012 - 2200 - Transcript of Proceedings held on 12-06-12, before Judge Lucy H. Koh. Court Reporter/Transcriber Lee-Anne Shortridge, Telephone number 408-287-4580. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerks Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction.After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 3/18/2013. (las, ) (Filed on 12/18/2012) (Entered: 12/18/2012)

12/18/2012 - 2201 - MOTION to Stay re 2190 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, Samsung's Motion to Stay the Effect of Portions of the Court's December 10 Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions to File Under Seal (Dkt. No. 2190) filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.(a New York corporation), Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. Responses due by 1/2/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Jon Steiger in Support of Samsung's Motion to Stay, # 2 Exhibit 1 to the Steiger Declaration, # 3 Proposed Order Granting Samsung's Motion to Stay)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 12/18/2012) (Entered: 12/18/2012)

As you can see, we won't get to read the transcript of the December 6th hearing until March, so a big thank you to our reporter for attending on our behalf. Otherwise, we'd be very much in the dark.

  


Apple Files Notice of Appeal to Federal Circuit Re Denial of Injunction Against Samsung ~pj | 483 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Thursday, December 20 2012 @ 07:11 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Thursday, December 20 2012 @ 07:12 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspicks Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Thursday, December 20 2012 @ 07:13 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

COMES Thread Here...
Authored by: lnuss on Thursday, December 20 2012 @ 07:14 PM EST
...

---
Larry N.

[ Reply to This | # ]

seriously apple
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 20 2012 @ 07:19 PM EST
Enough is enough you are not gonna get a sales ban, your patents are starting to
see what they really are, bogus and invalid. Save what little face you have
left.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Vote for Groklaw Thread LAST CHANCE!
Authored by: OpenSourceFTW on Friday, December 21 2012 @ 01:26 AM EST
Voting ends on the 21st, along with the world. :P

Vote now!: http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100 (Legal Technology Category)

---
I voted for Groklaw (Legal Technology Category) in the 2012 ABA Journal Blawg 100. Did you? http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100. Voting ends Dec 21.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • I voted! - Authored by: artp on Friday, December 21 2012 @ 01:23 PM EST
So who gets to appeal?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 21 2012 @ 10:47 AM EST
Presumably Samsung will want to appeal against the decision itself - what with it being the clear result of jury misconduct and finding them guilty of infringing patents that have since turned out to be utterly invalid and worthless all along. Will Samsung and Apple both appeal? Who will be heard (first or at all)? What's the process for a situation like this where both sides have serious issues with the outcome of the case?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Transcriptions PDF to text
Authored by: The Cornishman on Friday, December 21 2012 @ 01:58 PM EST
PJ wrote:
If you would like to help with that, feel free to leave a comment as to which one you will work on. I'm almost done with day 6, so pick another one, please.

I've picked up day 8, for no very good reason :) and it's pretty easy, with pdf2txt and some sed to come up with a straight text version of the PDF, without the line numbers. It's plug-ugly, though, all in CAPS and no line longer than 64 characters.

PJ: do you want the raw text? Shall I additionally, or as an alternative, try to make it more like the transcripts you've already shared with us?

Jonathan

---
(c) assigned to PJ

[ Reply to This | # ]

This year, I don't know anyone wants iphone
Authored by: kawabago on Friday, December 21 2012 @ 08:05 PM EST
This year I don't know anyone who wants an iPhone. People are
starting to see Apple for what it is, a greedy abusive
corporation. That is sentiment Samsung and Google couldn't
buy, Apple had to give it to them on a platter.

[ Reply to This | # ]

A permanent ban based on preliminary invalidated patents?
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 22 2012 @ 04:09 AM EST
If Apple does not want to have their whole case go up in flames in the Federal
Circuit, they should try focusing on those aspects of the case where they have
an actual chance on appeal.

While the Federal Circuit is known to favor patent holders even in flat defiance
of Supreme Court rulings, I would still suppose that there are limits to how far
they are willing to be considered the laughing stock of the legal profession.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )