Apple's 'Rubber Banding' Patent Key to Samsung Lawsuit Preliminarily Invalidated

FOSS Patents reports on a new court filing from Samsung revealing that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued a preliminary decision ruling that Apple's "rubber banding" patent that was a key part of the $1 billion lawsuit against Samsung has been invalidated. While numerous other reviews and appeals will undoubtedly take place in the coming months, the preliminary ruling is certainly a blow to Apple's cases against Samsung and others.

In a non-final Office action the USPTO has declared all 20 claims of Apple's rubber-banding patent (U.S. Patent No, 7,469,381 invalid, including claim 19, which Apple successfully asserted against Samsung in the summer trial in California. In fact, claim 19 is one of several claims to be deemed invalid for two reasons, either one of which would be sufficient on its own.

uspto rubber banding invalid
The report notes that the rejection could influence Judge Lucy Koh to at least partially rule in favor of Samsung's requests that the jury's verdict be overturned by the court as having been improperly issued.

The patent rejection comes after an anonymous third party challenged the validity of the patent earlier this year, requesting a reexamination by the patent office. The rubber banding patent covers the ability for iOS content to "bounce back" when a user has scrolled to the top or bottom of a given page. The feature provides an aesthetically pleasing means of alerting the user that they have reached the end of the content rather than simply stopping abruptly, but the USPTO has now ruled that the feature does not qualify as novel in light of prior art on the matter. That prior art includes not only a European patent from AOL but also a previous Apple patent.

Popular Stories

Apple iPhone 16e Feature

Apple Announces iPhone 16e With A18 Chip and Apple Intelligence, Pricing Starts at $599

Wednesday February 19, 2025 8:02 am PST by
Apple today introduced the iPhone 16e, its newest entry-level smartphone. The device succeeds the third-generation iPhone SE, which has now been discontinued. The iPhone 16e features a larger 6.1-inch OLED display, up from a 4.7-inch LCD on the iPhone SE. The display has a notch for Face ID, and this means that Apple no longer sells any iPhones with a Touch ID fingerprint button, marking the ...
iphone 17 pro asherdipps

iPhone 17 Pro Models Rumored to Feature Aluminum Frame Instead of Titanium Frame

Tuesday February 18, 2025 12:02 pm PST by
Over the years, Apple has switched from an aluminum frame to a stainless steel frame to a titanium frame for its highest-end iPhones. And now, it has been rumored that Apple will go back to using aluminum for three out of four iPhone 17 models. In an investor note with research firm GF Securities, obtained by MacRumors this week, Apple supply chain analyst Jeff Pu said the iPhone 17, iPhone...
apple launch feb 2025 alt

Here Are the New Apple Products We're Still Expecting This Spring

Thursday February 20, 2025 5:06 am PST by
Now that Apple has announced its new more affordable iPhone 16e, our thoughts turn to what else we are expecting from the company this spring. There are three product categories that we are definitely expecting to get upgraded before spring has ended. Keep reading to learn what they are. If we're lucky, Apple might make a surprise announcement about a completely new product category. M4...
Generic iOS 18

Here's When Apple Will Release iOS 18.4

Wednesday February 19, 2025 11:38 am PST by
Following the launch of the iPhone 16e, Apple updated its iOS 18, iPadOS 18, and macOS Sequoia pages to give a narrower timeline on when the next updates are set to launch. All three pages now state that new Apple Intelligence features and languages will launch in early April, an update from the more broader April timeframe that Apple provided before. The next major point updates will be iOS ...
apple launch feb 2025

Tim Cook Teases an 'Apple Launch' Next Wednesday

Thursday February 13, 2025 8:07 am PST by
In a social media post today, Apple CEO Tim Cook teased an upcoming "launch" of some kind scheduled for Wednesday, February 19. "Get ready to meet the newest member of the family," he said, with an #AppleLaunch hashtag. The post includes a short video with an animated Apple logo inside a circle. Cook did not provide an exact time for the launch, or share any other specific details, so...
apple c1

Apple Unveils 'C1' as First Custom Cellular Modem

Wednesday February 19, 2025 8:08 am PST by
Apple today announced its first custom cellular modem with the name "C1," debuting in the all-new iPhone 16e. The new modem contributes to the iPhone 16e's power efficiency, giving it the longest battery life of any iPhone with a 6.1-inch display, such as the iPhone 15 and iPhone 16. Expanding the benefits of Apple silicon, C1 is the first modem designed by Apple and the most...
Apple Northbrook

Apple Store Permanently Closing at Struggling Mall in Chicago Area

Tuesday February 18, 2025 8:46 pm PST by
Apple is permanently closing its retail store at the Northbrook Court shopping mall in the Chicago area. The company confirmed the upcoming closure today in a statement, but it has yet to provide a closing date for the location. Apple Northbrook opened in 2005, and the store moved to a larger space in the mall in 2017. Apple confirmed that affected employees will continue to work for the...

Top Rated Comments

Macboy Pro Avatar
161 months ago
Well, you can't infringe on an invalid patent. And now Apple seems to have burned it's bridges with one of its biggest suppliers. The arrogance of the big Apple is incredible.
Score: 23 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ouimetnick Avatar
161 months ago
The big question is why were they able to get a patent on it to begin with?

Just goes to show how screwed up the US Patent system actually is.

While I'm at it, I want to get a patent for a patent. That way when ever someone tried to patent something, I can sue them for infringing on the patent that covers applying and getting a patent.

I'll be rich.

Or I would use it to stop stupid people/companies from patenting stupid things.
Score: 23 Votes (Like | Disagree)
KnightWRX Avatar
161 months ago
Obvious? If it's so obvious, why no one made it before?

Pretty sure "Prior art" means someone made it before... :rolleyes:

----------

Only obvious in hindsight.

Pretty sure, again, Hindsight doesn't apply to "Prior".
Score: 21 Votes (Like | Disagree)
samcraig Avatar
161 months ago
For me this isn't about Apple or Samsung (this ruling) - this is validation that the patent system has problems. And that, given time, it IS possible for them to be corrected (albeit slowly).

This invalidation is actually a great win for the consumer in the long run. That's not an Anti-Apple sentiment. Like I said - this is about things that shouldn't have been patented in the first place being re-evaluated.
Score: 18 Votes (Like | Disagree)
KnightWRX Avatar
161 months ago
like to know if that person/organization filed for a patent.

Irrelevant.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
MH01 Avatar
161 months ago
The big question is why were they able to get a patent on it to begin with?

Just goes to show how screwed up the US Patent system actually is.

Spot on.

Seems patenting the **** of our everything is now part of the development process. No matter how insignificant it might seem. And being a bureaucratic system, requests will get approved to be later rejected cause they were never analysed in the first place.

110% in agreement on how screwed up the patent system is.
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)