Samsung welcomed the decision saying, “We continue to believe that Apple was not the first to design a tablet with rectangular shape and rounded corners.”
The decision from Britain’s Court of Appeal also upholds other parts of the judgment that require Apple to run advertisements in selected newspapers and on its website, declaring that Samsung did not copy its registered tablet designs.
An appeal to the Supreme Court in Britain remains open to Apple, though it is uncertain whether Apple would continue the fight.
In the U.S., Samsung has already asked for a retrial of the matter upon grounds of jury misconduct, claiming in its court filing that the head juror was ‘untruthful’ and ‘biased’ in giving the $1 billion judgment against Samsung.
The jury foreman Velvin Hogan had concealed the fact that he was previously sued by Seagate, his former employer, for failing to repay a promissory note in 1993. Six months later, Hogan had filed for bankruptcy.
Currently, Samsung is the largest shareholder of Hogan’s former employer Seagate.
Samsung’s filing asking a retrial mentions, “Mr. Hogan’s failure to disclose the Seagate suit raises issues of bias that Samsung should have been allowed to explore in questioning.”