Dutch court rules Apple has asserted European patent No 2059868 against Samsung in a number of countries.
The patent claims a computer implemented method with steps of detecting movement of a physical object on a touch screen and translating displayed digital objects in response to the detection. The claimed method requires “bounce back” of the display of a first digital object after the end of detection a first movement and display of a second digital object in response to detection of a second movement.
In Germany, a court has ruled that Samsung’s Galaxy products with Android 3.0 infringe such a claim. The Dutch court reached a contrary decision. It pointed out that Samsung’s Galaxy products display a second digital object in response to detection that the duration of the first movement exceeded a threshold.
The court admitted that the products were covered by a strictly literal construction of the claim. But a more limited claim construction was warranted. The claim put the skilled person on a trail that the response to the second movement required the context of the prior first movement with bounce back. This was confirmed by the description, and it addressed the object of the invention. The strictly literal reading would cover embodiments that were contrary to the teaching of the description and did not address the object of the invention. Therefore, display of a second digital object dependent on duration of movement, independent of the context of the prior first movement, did not infringe.
The court ruled that a previous version of Samsung’s Galaxy products did infringe and issued an injunction for those products and an order to determine damages. The court ordered new pleadings on whether an order should be issued to pay costs involved with a claim that the patent was invalid. A recent decision by the court of justice of the European union (Bericap vs Plasinova) made this necessary.