|
Authored by: dio gratia on Friday, June 08 2012 @ 02:35 AM EDT |
Judge Posner
"Tentatively" Tosses Apple v. Motorola - Neither Can Prove Damages
[PDF]:
On the basis of the motions filed by the parties
regarding damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, and mootness, and the
parties’ filings this morning addressed to these matters and the hearing held
this afternoon, I have tentatively decided that the case should be dismissed
with prejudice because neither party can establish a right to
relief.
...
...Apple urges me to hold a full evidentiary hearing on its
claims for injunctive relief. The request was made for the first time at this
afternoon's hearing, after the parties had fully briefed the question of
entitlement to injunctive relief; in any event I think the existing evidentiary
record is adequate.
Apple seeks declaratory relief as an alternative to
injunctive relief; I do not believe that it has any right to declaratory relief,
but if it did I would be strongly inclined to exercise my discretion to deny it
such relief in light of my ruling that it has failed to prove its damages and
injunction cases.
But all this requires a fuller explanation, which I will
endeavor to provide in my opinion; I expect to issue it within a
week.
Wow, sure plays a different tune than Mr. Mueller's play on
the story:
Apple-Motorola jury trial in Chicago canceled, but
the lawsuit isn't over yet
...
The judge has not yet decided on
whether the parties are entitled to injunctive relief. He is now thinking about
this and will enter a written order at a later time. If he decides that
injunctive relief is a possibility with respect to one or more patents (Apple
has four patents in play, as compared to one Motorola FRAND patent), then there
could still be a bench trial (the parties would present their witnesses and make
their arguments in front of Judge Posner.
We're not seeing biased
reporting now are we? In general if someone can't demonstrate damages, why
would they be eligible for injunctive relief? Wouldn't that speak to
non-practice or is it a case of retalitory Patent Ambush for purported Patent
Holdup? Apple hasn't shown harm, and the evidentiary record speaks to that.
Apple appears to be after a second bite of the er, apple with Mr. Mueller
apparently desparately seizing on the possibility that someone might sooner or
later rule on FRAND.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|