November 18, 2024

Patent Office Rejects Apple Patent Used Against Samsung

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has dealt a blow to Apple in its legal battle with Samsung Electronics over smartphone patents, declaring that a patent that helped Apple win $1.05 billion in damages against Samsung in a jury trial should not have been granted.

The patent office’s action this week was made public by Samsung in a filing on Wednesday in Federal District Court in San Jose. In the court document, Samsung, the Korean electronics giant, said the action should be weighed in evaluating its petition for a new trial and its challenge to the damages award.

Apple is expected to appeal the patent office’s ruling, so the patent has not been invalidated yet.

The patent, No. 7,844,915, is one of six that a jury in August found that Samsung had infringed. It covers usability software that distinguishes between single-touch and multitouch gestures on a smartphone or tablet screen.

The patent is widely known as the “pinch to zoom” patent, but the software is actually narrower in scope. Apple’s legal documents refer to it as controlling a “scroll versus gesture” feature.

Of the six patents that were the basis of the ruling against Samsung, this is the second that the patent office has concluded, on re-examination, should not have been granted.

In October, the office came to the same conclusion about the patent for Apple’s “rubber-banding” or “bounce” feature, which makes a digital page bounce when a user pulls a finger from the top of the touch screen to the bottom.

“It’s a strike against Apple, but it is far from the whole ballgame,” said Mark A. Lemley, a Stanford Law School professor.

Apple is likely to challenge the patent office’s action this week, as it did the October decision.

If the patent office’s rejections hold up after Apple makes its appeals, the court could grant Samsung’s motion for a new trial. It is more likely, however, that the damages award will be considerably reduced, said James Bessen, a patent expert at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/technology/patent-office-rejects-apple-patent-used-against-samsung.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

DealBook: S.E.C. Drops Proceeding Against Rajat Gupta

Rajat K. Gupta, a former director of Goldman Sachs.Seokyong Lee/Bloomberg NewsRajat K. Gupta, a former director of Goldman Sachs.

8:26 p.m. | Updated

The Securities and Exchange Commission has dropped its administrative proceeding against Rajat K. Gupta, a former director of Goldman Sachs and Procter Gamble, handing him a victory in his legal battle with the agency.

“The commission has determined that it is in the public interest to dismiss these proceedings,” the S.E.C. said in a two-page order filed late Thursday.

In March, the S.E.C. filed an unusual civil administrative proceeding against Mr. Gupta that accused him of leaking secret board discussions to Raj Rajaratnam, the hedge fund billionaire, now convicted. The proceeding would have been heard by an S.E.C. administrative law judge in Washington.

In response to the administrative action, Mr. Gupta’s lawyers fired back with a lawsuit against the S.E.C. that accused it of denying Mr. Gupta his right to a jury trial and treating him differently than the other Mr. Rajaratnam-related defendants, all of whom the agency sued in federal court.

Last month, the presiding judge in the case, Jed S. Rakoff, issued a ruling that allowed Mr. Gupta’s lawsuit to proceed and criticized the S.E.C. for bringing the administrative proceeding instead of a federal lawsuit.

“Mr. Gupta is very pleased that as a result of his lawsuit, the S.E.C. has dismissed its administrative proceeding and he will no longer be singled out for disparate treatment,” Gary P. Naftalis, a lawyer for Mr. Gupta, said in a statement. “As we’ve said previously, the S.E.C.’s allegations are totally baseless and cannot withstand scrutiny.”

Mr. Gupta, who also served as the head of the consulting firm McKinsey Company, has agreed to drop his lawsuit against the S.E.C., according to court papers filed Thursday.

The S.E.C. can still sue Mr. Gupta in federal court before Judge Rakoff. Federal prosecutors, meanwhile, have not brought criminal charges against Mr. Gupta but called him an unindicted co-conspirator of Mr. Rajaratnam.

A spokeswoman for the United States attorney’s office in Manhattan declined to comment. An S.E.C. spokesman said that “the staff is fully committed to the case and will proceed as appropriate.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=8054fda15bdbfe2907c3f2ecdbcd85d7