Apple hit with $1.6bn iTunes patent claim
Patent licensing company Smartflash has asked a US court to triple the $532.9 million sum it ordered Apple to pay in a patent dispute, because it claims the infringement was ‘wilful’.
In court documents filed on Friday (May 1) at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Smartflash argued that Apple’s infringement of three of its patents should be ruled to be ‘ wilful’.
The request follows the court’s decision in February to award Smartflash $532.9 million damages for infringing patents that cover methods used in computer software to access and store downloaded songs, videos and games.
The total amount requested is $1,598,700,000.
Furthermore, Smartflash is requesting that the case be treated as ‘exceptional’. Under US law when cases are deemed to be ‘exceptional’ a judge can rule that the infringing party pay the legal costs of the asserting party.
Smartflash alleged that Apple’s defence was intended to delay the case and ultimately led to the licensing company paying more on litigation costs. Shortly before the trial, Apple requested the case be heard in a different location, but this was denied by the court.
The court documents state: “Apple stopped at nothing to try to delay or avoid trial on the merits.
“The entirety of Apple’s defence was weak. And in a fruitless attempt to cover up this weakness, Apple intentionally pursued every possible defence, regardless of merit. Apple’s constant pursuit of its weak defences has drastically increased Smartflash’s cost of litigation,” it added.
A day after the ruling (February 25), Smartflash filed a second patent claim against Apple alleging that the same patents were infringed in Apple’s iPhone 6 and iPad mini 3. Both products were released after Smartflash filed the first claim in 2013.
But the court’s decision could be affected by a challenge from Samsung in a separate case that covers the same patents.
Last month, the US Patent and Trademark Office agreed to review the validity of four patents asserted by Smartflash in its dispute against Samsung, after the phone maker filed an opposition.
Neither Smartflash nor Apple responded to requests for comment.
