* Apple asks appeals court to intervene in patent dispute
* Appeals judges suggest Apple needs more evidence
* Importance of “snap-back” feature in dispute
By David Ingram
WASHINGTON, April 6 (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on
Friday showed few signs that it was prepared to support a
request by Apple Inc to block immediately the sale of
some Samsung Electronics smartphones and tablets.
In a high-stakes patent dispute, the court heard arguments
about whether a federal trial judge acted correctly in December
when she ruled that Apple failed to provide enough evidence to
support an injunction of Samsung’s Galaxy product line.
The court’s judges reacted with skepticism to a premise put
forward by Apple’s lawyer that for the purpose of getting an
injunction, Apple does not need to show a causal link between
patent infringement and a loss of customers.
Apple’s lawyer, Michael Jacobs, said it is enough to show
that Samsung likely infringed on Apple patents used in products
such as the iPhone, and that Apple is likely to be hurt. The
trial judge found those things but not enough evidence of a
causal link.
Judge William Bryson on Friday asked about a hypothetical
case in which an automaker copied the design of a cupholder from
a second automaker. Under Apple’s argument, if the second
automaker later lost market share, it could ask for an
injunction against sales by the first automaker, Bryson said.
“Can that possibly be right?” he asked. Bryson is one of
three judges who heard the case before the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit.
Judge Sharon Prost said some evidence of a link is
important. Harm such as lost customers, she said, “could have
been for reasons completely different from the infringement.”
The Apple-Samsung dispute is scheduled to go to trial in
July in federal court in California.
Apple, maker of the iPad and the iPhone, wants the immediate
injunction because even if it wins at trial, it might not see
the benefits of a verdict until late in 2012, Jacobs said.
An order to stop sales by South Korea-based Samsung would
have the potential to affect settlement considerations.
The two companies are fighting their legal battle worldwide,
filing complaints in at least 10 countries as they struggle for
market share in the tablet and smartphone markets.
POPULARITY OF ‘SNAP-BACK’
The appellate judges on Friday wrestled with what evidence
Apple would need to show that a competitor got ahead through
unauthorized use of a patented Apple feature. For example, would
it be enough for Apple to survey consumers about which features
are important to them? How many consumers would matter?
That kind of requirement would make it all but impossible
for a patent holder to win an injunction because it is difficult
to get inside a consumer’s mind, Jacobs said.
“We know it is a combination of elements that goes into any
purchasing decision,” Jacobs said.
One characteristic that the Apple and Samsung products share
is the “snap-back,” which affects how a user navigates the
touch-screen on a tablet or smartphone.
Samsung did not copy the “snap-back” feature or any other
patented part of Apple’s design, but even if it did, that would
not be a primary draw for a consumer, said Samsung lawyer
Kathleen Sullivan.
“There is absolutely no evidence that any consumer, as
opposed to an engineer, has said, ‘I’m going to purchase
something because of this snap-back feature,'” Sullivan said.
During oral argument, the lawyers and judges alluded to
internal Samsung documents in which engineers or other employees
considered the importance of the snap-back feature. Those
documents have not been made public.
Apple and Samsung agreed to submit letters to the court by
April 13 on how best to preserve confidential information in the
case. A ruling by the appeals court could come any time
afterward.
