Apple disallowed from adding Galaxy S4 to Samsung patent suit

Apple disallowed from adding Galaxy S4 to Samsung patent suit

Summary: The iPhone and iPad maker cannot add its main rival's smartphone to a list of devices it wants banned for allegedly infringing its patents, a court rules.


A court has told Apple that it cannot add its main rival in the smartphone space to a list of allegedly patent infringing devices.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal said Samsung's Galaxy S4 smartphone should not be added to the list as it would be a "tax on the court's resources."

"They consume considerable amounts of the court’s time and energy," Grewal added, according to Bloomberg, and noted that each time the two companies appear in court they take time away from others who "also require and are entitled to the court's attention."

The patent spat continues between Apple and Samsung over technology included in the latest smartphones, including the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S3.

Apple had floated the idea of adding the Galaxy S4 to its second suit against Samsung by substituting one allegedly infringing device for the S4, which Apple had determined "is an infringing device."

Apple's lawyer Josh Krevitt said excluding the latest Samsung smartphone would require Apple to submit a brand new suit, because by the time of the trial the smartphones will be out of date.

In an earlier case, Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $1.05 billion in damages, following the ruling that the Korea-based electronics firm infringed its rival's design patents. The damages were lowered to just over half the figure, and a new damages trial was ordered for November.

Topics: Patents, Apple, iPhone, Samsung

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • I get the impression the court is beginnig to realize they made a mistake.

    • How about allowing us to edit our posts ZDnet?

      This software sucks.
  • Apple is about to find out what happens

    when you don't pay off the government. Yes, I know, Apple, you have followed all tax laws, but what you didn't do was grease the right palms on capitol Hill. You see, you didn't pay your protection money to the state, and now they are going to show you how the game is played. And because you are such a large and rich company, and the state has done such a good job in getting Joe sixpack to hate rich, large companies, you will have no friends among the people. Just remember what the current administration told the banks when he first took office: "The only thing keeping you safe from the pitchforks is me."
    • Um.....

      Er... what does this have to do with the judiciary branch? Because they're the ones deciding this.
      • Re: what does this have to do with the judiciary branch?

        How those are any different?

        "tax on the court's resources."

        translation: give us more money or go away!
        • No

          No, what they're saying is: you're not the only two companies in the country, and we have to hear other cases, too.

          You seem to think the courts have unlimited time and resources. That's simply not the case.
          • What the hell...?

            Just how far has the quality of America's education gone when the adults of this generation have terribad reading comprehension skills?

            I thought it was obvious the judge was referring to the need to be able to try cases expediently in the interest of a docket that's already jam packed. How the hell does one draw the inference that the judge was demanding protection money?!

            Jesus Christ.
          • dunamis100: "How the hell does one draw the inference ..."

            Welcome to ZDNet, where tech companies and their products are elevated to religions. In this particular case, it's the Apple fans.

            And danbi's education (or lack, thereof) can't be blamed on America.

            My interpretation? We're tired. And we really didn't go to law school and pass the bar exams for this.
            Rabid Howler Monkey
    • Wow...

      Don't comment on things you know nothing about. Magistrate judges aren't elected.
      • Appointed?

        No, they are appointed by the government. No conflict of interest inherent in the system at all. The Judiciary is totally independent from the government, and represent non-government interests, they don't represent the interests of those who appointed them at all That would be conflict of interest!!!
  • Don't pay the Shareholders, pay the lawyers!

    That's the people they are making all the profits for
  • Patent System is Broken

    The current Patent system is broken as the Patent office these days basically rubber stamps most patent requests without a full search off all current patents or prior art as it would take far to long for them to do so. Instead they just wait for court cases to prove a patent invalid and then cancel them. Most of the current multi-touch patents owned by Apple and Microsoft are very similar and you could say are based heavily on prior art. If anyone should have the multi-touch patents it is the University of Toronto's Input Research Group who developed the first human-input multi-touch system in the early 80s. Their are even academic research papers dating from the early 90s that also describe how use a lot of these multi finger gestures to control things that Apple and other companies have been patenting as their own work!