Samsung seeks iPhone, iPad sale ban in Dutch court
Headline Legal News
Samsung asked a Dutch court Monday to slap an injunction on Apple Inc. to prevent it from selling iPhones and iPad tablets in the Netherlands, saying Apple does not have licenses to use 3G mobile technology in the devices.
The legal battle is the latest round in a series of claims and counterclaims of patent breaches by the rival technology heavyweights playing out in courtrooms around the world.
Samsung Electronics Co. lawyer Bas Berghuis told a civil judge at The Hague District Court that Apple "never bothered to ask about licenses" before it started selling 3G-enabled iPhones.
Apple lawyer Rutger Kleemans hit back by accusing Samsung of using the patent dispute to "hold Apple hostage" because of Apple's legal battles accusing Samsung of copying its iPhone and iPad designs.
"It's a holdup," Kleemans said. "Because Apple dared to take action against Samsung's copycat tactics."
Kleemans urged the court to reject the injunction request, saying the patents involved "are not designed to be used as a weapon against Apple."
No date was immediately given for a ruling.
Earlier this month, a court in Duesseldorf, Germany, ruled that Samsung cannot sell its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Germany because its design too closely resembled the iPad2. The ruling only applied to direct sales from the Samsung, meaning distributors who acquire the Tab 10.1 from abroad could resell them in Germany. Samsung said it would appeal that judgment.
Related listings
-
Court rules that UBS trader should stay in custody
Headline Legal News 09/22/2011An alleged rogue trader accused of losing Swiss banking giant UBS about $2.3 billion is "sorry beyond words," his lawyer said Thursday, as a judge ordered him to be held in jail until a hearing next month. Kweku Adoboli, 31, is charged with four offe...
-
Guilty plea for Va. man in $318K Social Security fraud
Headline Legal News 09/09/2011A Bristol man has pleaded guilty to stealing Social Security benefits and making false statements in an attempt to hide the thefts. Seventy-one-year-old David Ross entered the plea Thursday in federal court in Abingdon. Ross faces a sentence of up to...
-
Group seeks appellate action on gays in military
Headline Legal News 09/01/2011The military's ban on openly gay troops will be lifted within weeks, but the policy can still be re-enacted in the future. That's why a Republican gay rights organization that sued the Obama administration to stop enforcement of the policy says it wi...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.