Google I/O China's Mars rover Apple iMac M1 review Grand Theft Auto 5 Apple Music, Amazon add high fidelity Child tax credit calculator

Judge dismisses Apple vs Motorola patent case

An irritated judge has thrown out the Apple vs Motorola patent case, saying neither has a valid argument.

An irritated judge has thrown out the Apple vs Motorola patent case, saying neither company "can establish a right to relief", The Verge reports. He basically thinks that neither Motorola nor Apple has a valid case.

Judge Richard Posner is the man getting frustrated with both companies, and considering all the accusations they keep flinging at each other, who can blame him? Posner warned Apple's lawyers about filing too many motions last month, so it's not like he's willing to take any nonsense from the company.

And what reason did he give for dismissing the case? He says neither company can prove exactly how much money the alleged patent infringements have cost them, which is quite a good point. Both companies are asking for financial compensation, so Posner says blocking products from going on sale would be pointless.

He's issued a temporary order for now, but might change his mind when he reaches a final decision, which should be sometime next week, and there is a chance, albeit slight, that he'll let the case run.

Motorola issued a very positive statement on the ruling: "We are pleased by the Illinois trial court's tentative ruling today dismissing Apple's patent claims and look forward to receiving the full decision."

Apple and Motorola have been embroiled in patent disputes on both sides of the Atlantic, with Moto even succeeding in having some Apple devices banned from sale in Germany (though the decision was overturned pretty quickly). Apple won the slide-to-unlock patent dispute though, with Motorola being found guilty of infringing it with its own version, though not on the Xoom.

Posner also refused to bar the late Steve Jobs' quotes about Google from being referenced in the case (seeing as Google now owns Motorola).

Was the judge right? Or does each company have a legitimate case? Let me know your thoughts in the comments, or on our Facebook page.