District Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler division, ruled Tuesday that the earlier damages were set aside and vacated as the jury at trial may have not been properly instructed.
Advertisement
Judge Gilstrap wrote last month that he meant to hear oral arguments on a possible new trial on damages as the evidence presented at trial shows that Smartflash’s damages model did not incorporate the entire market value rule. Apple’s lawyers had argued that jurors were unable to distinguish between patented and unpatented features. “The Court is persuaded, in the clarity of post-trial hindsight, that such instruction may have created a skewed damages horizon for the jury”. Gilstrap added that the methods he used to determine the damages were legally correct but inapplicable to the case. Since Apple plans to continue fighting this case, any damages Smartflash could potentially get will be tied up in the court system for some time.
Apple and Smartflash could not be immediately reached for comment.
In regard to the disputed patents, the company claims that its founder, Patrick Racz, had discussed the nature of the patents with an individual that ultimately joined top staff at Apple. Caldwell strenuously denies the idea that his client is a “patent troll”. “We refused to pay off this company for the ideas our employees spent years innovating and unfortunately we have been left with no choice but to take this fight up through the court system.”Smartflash LLC was originally seeking $852 million in damages, and claimed it was entitled to a percentage of sales of Apple products used to access iTunes, such as iPhones, iPads and Macs””.
Smartflash has patent lawsuits pending in the same venue against Google, Amazon, and Samsung as well.
Advertisement
Smartflash accused Apple in a May 2013 lawsuit of infringing patents for accessing and storing songs, videos and games, enabling the Cupertino, California-based company to sell more of its iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch products.
