iPhone 5 targeted in Samsung's new legal attack on Apple

iPhone 5 violates Samsung patents, alleges the Korean company. Samsung hopes to block sale of the iPhone 5 in the US.

Reuters
A passerby photographs the Apple store logo with his Samsung Galaxy phone in central Sydney earlier this year. Apple and Samsung are again set to tangle in court – this time over the recently-released iPhone 5.

Back in late August, a jury in California ruled that Samsung had infringed on a range of Apple patents, and ordered the Korean tech giant to fork over a hefty $1 billion in damages. Although lawyers for Samsung have vowed to appeal – and according to some expert onlookers, Samsung may have a decent shot at getting the verdict overturned – the case was widely viewed as a "major win" for Apple. 

Then in September, Samsung struck back, vowing to add the iPhone 5 to its lawsuit if the handset used LTE technology (Samsung says it patented aspects of the LTE connectivity tech used by Apple).

Well, the iPhone 5 does have LTE technology, and so yesterday, Samsung went through with its threat, tacking the iPhone 5 onto a suit previously filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California

"Because the iPhone 5 has the same accused functionality as the previously accused versions of the iPhone, Samsung seeks, with its proposed amendment, to add the iPhone 5 as an accused device that infringes Samsung’s two UMTS standards patents and six feature patents at issue," reps for Samsung wrote in the suit, according to All Things D

Those "accused" devices include the iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPod touch, and the two most recent iterations of the iPad tablet. 

Neither Samsung nor Apple have commented on the lawsuit. 

In related news, California federal judge Lucy Koh has ruled that the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 did not violate Apple patents, as Apple had previous alleged. Koh subsequently lifted the sales ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1. 

For more on how technology intersects daily life, follow us on Twitter @venturenaut.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.