Search for: "Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc" Results 1 - 20 of 222
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jan 2023, 3:03 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Samsung Electronics Co., 727 F.3d 1214 (Fed. [read post]
27 Mar 2022, 10:36 am by Annsley Merelle Ward
  The House of Bruar admitted infringement of the Amira boot, such that it was only the Regina boot that was at issue in the recent judgment of Miss Recorder Amanda Michaels in Fairfax & Favor v House of Bruar [2022] EWHC 689. [read post]
1 Jul 2021, 10:28 am by Dennis Crouch
by Dennis Crouch In re Samsung Electronics Co., LTD (Fed. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 7:06 am by Kristian Soltes
Samsung Sued for Infringing Contactless Payment PatentsLaw Street Media – October 19, 2020 RFCyber Corp. filed a complaint for patent infringement against defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. on Friday in the Eastern District of Texas, alleging that Samsung infringed its contactless payment method via its Samsung Pay service on its mobile devices. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 4:37 am by Dennis Crouch
Unfortunately, the Court failed to acknowledge disgorgement as an equitable remedy in Samsung Electronics Co. v. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 9:44 am by Dennis Crouch
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 19-101 (reviewing jury verdict and 7th Amendment) Arunachalam v. [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 8:34 pm by Patent Docs
District Court for the Northern District of California brought by Yanbin Yu and Zhongxuan Zhang (patentee), Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. were sued for infringement of U.S. [read post]
12 Jul 2019, 9:00 am
 The first is that probably the four highest profile design cases in the UK in recent years (Procter & Gamble Co v Reckitt Benckiser (UK) Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 936, Dyson v Vax [2011] EWCA Civ 1206, Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd v Apple Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 1339, and PMS International Limited v Magmatic Limited [2016] UKSC 12 (i.e. [read post]
10 Feb 2019, 10:00 pm by Florian Mueller
The old 2009 matter, which apparently took almost a decade to make its way up to South Korea's top court, was about incentive payments by Qualcomm "to Samsung Electronics Co. and LG Electronics Inc. between 2000 and 2009 on condition that they only use Qualcomm chips for certain smartphone models" (quoting Yonhap). [read post]