Loading...
The stakes in the Apple-Samsung war of patents are so high that both companies are determined to take their legal battles to conclusion, seemingly without any settlement, and the trade winds are blowing in favor of the law firms. Last week, in court filings Apple made a motion before US District Judge Lucy Koh asking her to order Samsung to pay about $15.7 million in legal fees to Apple.
Apple’s motion for fees mentioned that the company has already paid Morrison & Foerster LLP approximately $60 million in legal fees through last month, not taking into account numerous lawyers who had billed less than $100,000 in the matter. For another week-long retrial, Apple will have to pay WilmerHale approximately $2 million.
Apple also mentioned that the bills were quite reasonable as the company enjoyed “a significant discount” on the standard rates of Morrison & Foerster due to its long-time client relationship.
In its filing, Apple submitted, “Awarding fees to Apple ‘flows quite naturally’ from the jury’s willfulness verdict as well as Samsung’s extensive record of willful, deliberate, and calculated decisions to copy the iPhone, in blatant disregard for Apple’s IP.”
The Apple-Samsung patent war has been raging for over the last two years across different courts in the world. In the US, most significant cases in this matter are before the federal court at San Jose, California, where juries have already granted Apple a damage award of roughly $930 million.
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
The case along with the award has been subject to several legal challenges traveling through the legal circuits and exhausting options before things are decided. In November, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had ruled that Koh had abused her discretion when denying Apple’s request for an injunction on the sale of Samsung devices that infringed utility patents. The matter was sent back with instructions to reconsider.
