transcript   Transcript

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.: En Banc Federal Circuit (Re)Defines Appellate Function in Patent Cases

Recorded on: Dec. 14, 2016
Running Time: 01:05:50

Full Transcript:

If you are a Privileged Member, just log in and start reading now! If you are not a Privileged Member, please click here to learn how unlimited access to PLI programs may be right for you and your firm.

To access the streaming media of this presentation, please purchase the corresponding seminar segment.

Taken from the briefing Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.:  En Banc Federal Circuit (Re)Defines Appellate Function in Patent Cases recorded December, 2016 in New York.

On October 7, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a surprise en banc opinion in one branch of the ongoing Apple v. Samsung smart phone wars. In an 8-3 opinion (by Circuit Judge Moore, with a concurrence in the result from Circuit Judge Hughes and over dissents from Chief Judge Prost and Circuit Judges Dyk and Reyna) the court simultaneously granted en banc review and without soliciting additional briefing or argument reversed a February panel decision reversing the denial JMOL in connection with a jury verdict of infringement as to one patent, and non-obviousness as to two other patents, re-instating Apple's $119 million damage award.

In Apple's petition for rehearing en banc, Apple argued that the reversal of the jury finding of infringement was the result of a reliance on extra-record evidence "none of which was of record and that the panel appeared to have located only through independent research." Apple further urged that this 'outside the record' extrinsic evidence was used to modify an agreed upon and unappealed claim construction, as well as in re-analyzing factual issues determined below. In fact, Apple argued that the panel reversed nearly every factual finding by the jury which favored Apple. Eight judges of the court apparently agreed, and completely reversed, with the original panel members staying unified in dissent.

Lecture Topics  [01:05:50]

Listen to Ira Jay Levy of Goodwin Procter LLP for an analysis of:

  • A review of the case background of the context for the Federal Circuit decision
  • The procedural path that supported the grant of rehearing en banc
  • Practical implications for:
    • structuring claim construction and evidence presentation in jury trials
    • briefing and arguing appeals to the Federal Circuit
  • What might be next for the "inner workings of the law of obviousness"

Presentation Material

  • Apple, Inc. v. Samsung: A Substantial Opinion
    Ira Jay Levy
  • Opinion re: Patent Infringement Suit and Countersuit bet. Apple and Samsung
    Ira Jay Levy
Ira Jay Levy ~ Goodwin Procter LLP
Transcript FAQ's
  • How Can I Access Transcripts?
    You must be a Member in good standing.

  • Can I access the Video?
    Yes, you can access the video if you have the Adobe Flash plugin installed. Click on the video camera icon when you mouse over each paragraph. The media will begin playback at that point.

  • Can I get CLE credit for reading the transcript?
    No, CLE credit cannot be earned for reading a transcript. CLE credit is issued only for verified attendance while watching a web program. If seeking credit, please verify the program's eligibility for credit and expiration date in your jurisdiction on the web segment launch page before commencing the program.

  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.