Samsung

News & Analysis as of

New Jersey District Court Cleans Up Complaint in Washing Machine Class Action Litigation

Washing machine class actions have been so active recently that some firms may be scrambling to form their own appliance-law practice groups. And who knows? That might not be a bad idea. Some of our greatest legal minds,...more

Toshiba & Samsung Argue - Technology Evolves/Patent Claims Don't

Judge Steve C. Jones entered a Markman Order (full order here) in the dispute between Synchrome Technology Inc. (“Synchrome”), as plaintiff, and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (“Toshiba”), and Samsung...more

March 20, 2014 Patent Filings

New Filings - Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd filed IPR 2014-00514 challenging U.S. Patent No. 8,023,580, assigned to Rembrandt Wireless Technologies, LP. ...more

March 19, 2014 Patent Terminations

Termination - The Board terminated Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.v. U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC, IPR2013-00384, Paper 16 (March 19, 2014), on the joint motion of the paries, the Board noting that the proceeding still...more

Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter #36

We are proud to celebrate three years of the Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter with this 36th edition. This month, we highlight developments in the following areas, which are likely to have an...more

Wearable Computing—The Next Front in the Smartphone Wars?

The rapidly shrinking size of computer components and the development of high-speed wireless signaling technologies have made mobile computing devices ubiquitous. Users can now access data and applications from virtually...more

Fourth Circuit Affirms Application of Section 365(n) to Ensure Patent Licensees Sufficiently Protected in Granting Relief to...

The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Jaffe v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., recently held that a U.S. bankruptcy court is not required under principles of comity to blindly apply foreign law to assets located in the...more

Apple v. Samsung: District Court Denies Samsung's Emergency Renewed Motion for Stay Pending Reexamination of Apple's Patent

In the continuing battle between Apple and Samsung, Samsung recently filed an emergency motion to stay pending reexamination of an Apple patent. To analyze whether the stay was appropriate, the district court provided an...more

Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter #34

We are pleased to present the 34th edition of the Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter. This month, we highlight news that will have an impact on business and litigation, including articles and links...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 11, November 2013

Appellate Decision Sets Stage for Next Skirmish In The Apple vs. Samsung Smart Phone Wars - A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has concluded that the district court was within its...more

Week in Review - November 21, 2013

As turkeys and pumpkin pie ingredients fill grocery carts across America, employee privacy issues fill the workplace. A recent survey shows that younger employees, ages 18 to 25, are more concerned about their privacy in the...more

Appellate Decision Sets Stage for Next Skirmish in the Apple vs. Samsung Smartphone Wars

In a case where the district court denied Apple’s request for a permanent injunction against certain Samsung smartphones, the Federal Circuit has remanded the matter to the district court in order to reconsider its...more

Apple v. Samsung: Samsung's Request for Stay of Discovery Orders Denied Where Magistrate Judge Made No Ruling on Privilege Issues...

As a result of Samsung's alleged violation of the protective order, Magistrate Judge Grewal previously ordered Samsung to produce to Apple emails and communications by Samsung employees that would shed light on the scope of...more

Apple v. Samsung: Court Orders Investigation into Potential Protective Order Violation by Samsung

As Apple and Samsung head toward yet another trial, Apple filed a motion for sanctions, accusing Samsung of violating the protective order in the case. Apple's motion asserted that Samsung's counsel had improperly shared...more

Top EDiscovery Case Summaries - October 2013: California: Citing Proportionality, Court Declines Motion to Compel Unnecessary...

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd., 2013 WL 4426512 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2013). In this patent infringement case, the defendants sought to compel further discovery from the plaintiff. In April 2013, the plaintiff produced...more

ITC Section 337 Update – October 4, 2013

Commission Issues Notice Of Shutdown Of Investigative Activities – On October 1, 2013, the Commission issued a Notice that, as a result of the broader shutdown of the federal government, the Commission “will shut down...more

The International Trade Commission: Easier Injunctive Relief-Except for Standard-Essential Patent Holders

Earlier this summer, the Obama administration dealt a blow to Standard-Essential Patent (SEP) holders by reversing an International Trade Commission (ITC) exclusion order granted in favor of an SEP holder. This action...more

USTR Rejects Import Ban On Apple Inc. Products

For the first time in 26 years, the White House exercised its veto authority over an International Trade Commission ("ITC") Exclusion Order. On June 4, 2013, the ITC determined in Investigation No. 337-TA-794 that Apple had...more

President Disapproves ITC Exclusion Order In -794 Investigation On Public Interest Grounds

On August 3, 2013, the President acting through the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) disapproved the decision of the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC or “Commission”) to issue an exclusion order in Certain Electronic...more

ITC Section 337 Update – August 7, 2013

White House Disapproves Commission Determination To Issue Exclusion Order In 794 Investigation – By Letter of August 3, 2013, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman, acting on authority from the President, notified...more

Obama Administration Disapproves ITC’s Exclusion Order on Apple Products

On August 3, 2013, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman, acting under the authority of President Obama, sent a letter noting his disapproval of the International Trade Commission’s determination to issue an exclusion...more

Obama Administration Vetoes Apple ITC Ban Is the chilling effect limited to SEP actions?

On the final day of a 60-day review period under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, the Obama Administration notified the U.S. International Trade Commission of its disapproval of an import and sales ban handed down in...more

White House Reins in ITC on Standard-Essential Patents

On Aug. 3, 2013, the Obama Administration vetoed the U.S. International Trade Commission’s June 4 order excluding certain Apple Inc. (“Apple”) products from import because they were found to infringe a standard-essential...more

President Obama Vetoes U.S. International Trade Commission Exclusion Order of Apple Products

For the first time in 26 years, a U.S. president and his administration have exercised statutory authority to veto an exclusion order from the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). This development may herald the end of...more

United States Trade Representative Issues Rare Disapproval of U.S. International Trade Commission's Order Excluding Apple Products...

In a rare move, on August 3, 2013, the United States Trade Representative of the Executive Office of the President (USTR) issued a letter disapproving the United States International Trade Commission's (ITC's) determination...more

42 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2