Showing posts with label Bloomberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bloomberg. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Apple Seeks Ban on Sales of Eight Samsung Phones in U.S.



By Joel Rosenblatt, Adam Satariano and Jun Yang on August 28, 2012
 
Apple Inc. (AAPL) is seeking a U.S. sales ban on eight models of Samsung Electronics Co. (005930)smartphones and the extension of a preliminary ban on a tablet computer after winning a patent trial against the South Korean company.
Apple, which won more than $1 billion Aug. 24 after a jury found Samsung infringed six of seven patents at stake in the trial, named the phones it wants barred in a filing yesterday with U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California. The list includes several devices in the bestselling Galaxy lineup.
The effect on Samsung’s sales will be negligible because Apple’s list only includes older devices that will account for less than 1.4 percent of the Korean company’s profits next year, said Mark Newman, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein who used to work at Samsung. The impact would be 6.3 percent if Apple manages to broaden a ban to newer devices and block 80 percent of all Samsung phones, he said.
“The older models aren’t selling much now, and the penalty will only be a one-time cost,” Im Jeong Jae, a Seoul-based fund manager at Shinhan BNP Paribas Asset Management Co., which oversees about $29 billion, said by phone today. “There won’t be big damage to Samsung’s sales and operating profit.”

‘Necessary Measures’

Samsung gained 1.3 percent to 1,195,000 won at the close of Seoul trading, while the benchmark Kospi index fell 0.1 percent. The stock dropped 7.5 percent yesterday. Apple shares slipped less than 1 percent to $674.80 at the close in New York.
“We will take all necessary measures to ensure the availability of our products in the U.S. market,” Nam Ki Yung, a Seoul-based spokesman for Samsung, said in an e-mailed statement today.
The U.S. verdict’s potential impact on Samsung’s research spending and its plans for new products is negative for the company, Moody’s Investors Service said in a statement today. It won’t immediately affect itscredit rating or outlook because the Suwon, South Korea-based company has “a strong diversified business position and substantial financial cushion to absorb the cash damages,” Moody’s said.
Apple, based in Cupertino, California, won a ban on U.S. sales of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in June that the South Korean company said wouldn’t significantly affect its business. Apple, which seeks to make that ban permanent, said in a court filing yesterday that Koh should also bar U.S. sales of a version of the tablet that runs on mobile networks, even though the product wasn’t covered by the Aug. 24 verdict.

Device Ban

Samsung sought to have the ban on the Tab 10.1 lifted on Aug. 26 after the jury found the device didn’t infringe the Apple design patent on which the June 26 court-ordered sales ban was based. The jury instead found that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 infringed three of Apple’s software patents.
Koh hasn’t ruled on any of the requests. She scheduled a Sept. 20 hearing for arguments on the potential bans, adding that the date may change.
Of the 28 Samsung devices Apple says are infringing, the eight targeted for a U.S. sales ban include the Galaxy Prevail, which was the list’s top seller by units in the U.S. from mid-2010 to mid-2012, generating revenue of $378 million, according to data submitted by Samsung in a court filing.

Apple’s List

Apple’s list includes the Galaxy S II Epic 4G, ranked by Samsung as the third-best seller by units in the U.S. among the disputed products; the Galaxy S 4G, the fourth-best; and the Galaxy S II T-Mobile, the eighth-best during the past two years.
The other devices include the Galaxy S Showcase, the S II AT&T, the S II Skyrocket and the Droid Charge. Some of the models began selling in the U.S. more than a year ago.
Of the $1.05 billion in damages awarded against Samsung, the eight phones accounted for $461 million. Combined sales of the models totaled 9.1 million units from mid-2010 to mid-2012.
The U.S. accounted for about 12 percent of Samsung’s smartphone sales in the second quarter, according to SK Securities Co. The company’s biggest market in the first half was western Europe at about 23 percent, followed by the Asia- Pacific region at 22 percent and China at 16 percent, according to HMC Investment Securities Co. in Seoul.
The latest Galaxy S III phone wasn’t targeted by Apple in the trial and isn’t on the proposed ban list. That exclusion is “a positive for Samsung,” Newman said.

Saturday, May 5, 2012

Apple Wins Ruling, Sanctions in Samsung Infringement Suit


Samsung Electronics Co. (005930), sanctioned by a U.S. judge for its failure to produce source code in a patent- infringement case in San Jose, California, won’t be able to use some evidence to defend itself against Apple Inc., a judge ruled.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal wrote in his May 4 ruling that Samsung “plainly violated” a court order requiring it to turn over code to Apple, and ruled that Samsung won’t be able to offer evidence in the case about its efforts to “design around” three patents at issue in the case.
In its lawsuit, Apple claims that Samsung’s 4G smartphone and Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer infringe its patents. In December, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose ruled against Apple’s request to block Suwon, South Korea-based Samsung from selling that phone and tablet in the U.S. That order followed an Australian court ruling lifting an injunction on the tablet there.
Samsung, which was the world’s largest seller of smartphones last year, and Cupertino, California-based Apple have filed at least 30 lawsuits against each other on four continents since April 2011.
In his ruling, Grewal said producing source code in patent litigation is “disruptive, expensive, and fraught with monumental opportunities to screw up.” Still, under federal law there is no exception to the requirement, especially when a defendant in a patent suit challenges the opposition’s failure to analyze the accused product’s source code, the judge said.

Design-Around

Grewal said he focused on Samsung’s so-called design-around source code developed for products with the “specific intent” of avoiding Apple’s patent claims. The ruling targets that code because “by their very nature design-arounds impact key questions of liability, damages and injunctive relief,” Grewal wrote.
“They are inevitably designed with substantial input from counsel for the specific purpose of distinguishing other products at issue,” Grewal wrote. “In short, they matter. A lot.”
Adam Yates, a Samsung spokesman, didn’t return an e-mail yesterday seeking comment on the ruling.
“It’s no coincidence that Samsung’s latest products look a lot like the iPhone and iPad, from the shape of the hardware to the user interface and even the packaging,” Apple said yesterday in an e-mailed statement. “This kind of blatant copying is wrong, and we need to protect Apple’s intellectual property when companies steal our ideas.”
The case is Apple Inc. (AAPL) v. Samsung Electronics Co., 11-01846, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose).
To contact the reporter on this story: Joel Rosenblatt in San Francisco atjrosenblatt@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net