{"id":441,"date":"2024-05-02T19:26:17","date_gmt":"2024-05-02T19:26:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ipfray.com\/?p=441"},"modified":"2024-05-02T19:26:17","modified_gmt":"2024-05-02T19:26:17","slug":"from-67-5m-to-142m-to-61m-roller-coaster-damages-award-in-samsung-sep-case-as-ptab-invalidates-one-of-two-patents","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ipfray.com\/staging1\/from-67-5m-to-142m-to-61m-roller-coaster-damages-award-in-samsung-sep-case-as-ptab-invalidates-one-of-two-patents\/","title":{"rendered":"From $67.5M to $142M to $61M: roller-coaster damages award in Samsung SEP case as PTAB invalidates one of two patents"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

Context:<\/strong> Last month, a jury in the Eastern District of Texas awarded non-practicing entity G+ Communications $142 million in damages (over two patents that originally belonged to ZTE) against Samsung (April 18, 2024 ip fray<\/strong> article<\/a>), slightly more than twice as much as the original $67.5 million award that Judge Rodney Gilstrap considered unreliable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What’s new:<\/strong> The more valuable one of the two patents-in-suit accounted for $81M (57%) of the $142M total award, which the jury was prudently asked to break down on a per-patent basis. And that patent has now been declared invalid by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent & Trademark Office. That decision is appealable to the Federal Circuit, as is everything else in the dispute, but as of today, the damages award would be down to $61M.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Direct impact:<\/strong> Absent a settlement, this case will be resolved by the Federal Circuit. Presently, the actual damages award is less than the outcome of the first trial, but without the retrial that resulted in a higher damages figure, the plaintiff would be worse off in the current situation, too. The PTAB decision may pave the way for a settlement now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wider ramifications:<\/strong> The damages-related roller coaster is not the only aspect that makes this case more interesting than the average patent litigation. A pretrial ruling by Judge Gilstrap concerning the possibility of an unwilling licensee losing the entitlement to a FRAND royalty rate could become the single most important question on appeal, with the potential to attract numerous amicus briefs from both sides of the FRAND argument.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Here’s the April 29, 2024 PTAB decision holding all challenged claims unpatentable:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n