Update On Samsung And Huawei In China (Settlement)

H
HLK

Contributor

HLK is a global cooperation combining Haseltine Lake Kempner LLP and HL Kempner Partnerschaft mbB and provides a full suite of IP services advising across the entire IPR Lifespan™ in all technical and scientific disciplines. With offices in London, Bristol, Munich, Leeds, Glasgow, and Guangzhou (China), HLK provides IP services across the globe. HLK’s resources and expertise are exclusively dedicated to IP protection: safeguarding the inventions, creative designs, brand identities and other innovations of its clients. HLK advises on the strategy, identification, protection, opposition and appeal, exploitation and enforcement of IP rights, and defends its clients from allegations of infringement by focusing on acquiring competitive advantage for its clients. HLK is privileged to work with some of the most exciting and forward-looking businesses in the world which are at the forefront of innovation and product development in their various spheres.
In January last year I wrote an article examining Huawei's win against Samsung in China regarding the 4G standard-essential patent lawsuit.
China Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment

In January last year I wrote an article examining Huawei's win against Samsung in China regarding the 4G standard-essential patent lawsuit.

This concerned Huawei suing Samsung for using its technology illegally and resulted in the Intermediate People's Court in Shenzhen ruling in Huawai's favour, ordering Samsung to pay them 80 million yuan followed by a separate ruling by a Shenzhen court which blocked the manufacture and sale of the technology in question by Samsung in China.

However, despite the case being settled in China, the parties, were also battling in courts in the United States (where Samsung had countersued), where the fight continued.

The trial was set to start in September where Samsung would aim to prove that Huawei had breached its FRAND licensing obligations. However the proceedings have now halted as the two firms have signed a join motion to the US appeals court asking it to pause the proceedings as they have entered into a settled agreement.

At last it seems that this feud, which has been ongoing since 2016, is finally over with the parties reaching an agreement.

It's currently unclear what the exact terms of the settlement are.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More