Monday saw the final day of testimony in the Apple v. Samsung patent trial, and it also saw Samsung’s counsel and its expert witness being berated by Judge Lucy Koh for possible coaching on what to say regarding claim construction of an Apple patent.
Apple and Samsung met in court on Monday to hash out the definition of a claim relating to Apple’s ‘647 patent covering data detectors. Specifically, Apple’s definition of “analyzer servers” as presented in Apple v. Samsung differs from a ruling handed down by the Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit last week that overturned the dismissal of a separate action involving Apple and Motorola.
The CAFC had sided with Judge Richard A. Posner’s interpretation of analyzer servers, not Apple’s version that it had been using to ague its case in the current trial. Therefore, Judge Koh allowed both sides an hour of time and one witness each to clarify the patent.
Apple recalled Carnegie Mellon professor Todd Mowry to testify that Samsung is still in infringement of Apple’s “quick links” patent, even with the reinterpretation by Judge Posner.
On Samsung’s part, it recalled University of North Carolina professor Kevin Jeffay. During his testimony, Jeffay said he held a interpretation of the analyzer server — one incongruent with Apple’s definition — but claimed the court ordered him not to discuss it. Judge Koh was not pleased with this, saying Samsung had “prepped” Jeffay to say he was blocked from using correct construction.
The judge struck Jeffay’s comments from the record, adding that the expert’s deposition was “very inconsistent.”
Jeffay’s testimony was then limited to an argument based on prior art in the form of Borland’s Sidekick utility, first launch on the MS-DOS operating system in 1984.
Both sides will present closing arguments today, then jurors will begin deliberation, and render a verdict.