Apple Fails to Win U.S. Injunction Against Samsung, Previously Offered 'Scrollback' Patent License

samsung logoLate last week, a U.S. judge declined to award a preliminary injunction that would have blocked Samsung from selling its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets in the United States, marking a setback for Apple in its effort to take on Samsung for its alleged infringement of Apple's designs and functionality. Judge Lucy Koh did, however, suggest that Samsung was likely to have infringed some of Apple's patents but declined to issue an injunction because of a lack of evidence that Apple would suffer irreparable harm if Samsung were allowed to continue selling the products while the case was being heard.

In her ruling, Koh wrote that for some of the smartphones, "Apple has established a likelihood of success on the merits at trial."

Koh added that Apple would likely prove Samsung infringed one of its tablet patents. However, Apple had not shown that it was likely to overcome Samsung's challenges to the patent's validity, Koh wrote.

Apple must demonstrate both infringement and validity to succeed in its lawsuit.

Interestingly, The Verge notes that the court order declining to issue the injunction reveals that Apple has in fact licensed to third parties one key iOS patent covering the "scrollback" feature displaying the linen texture when elastically scrolling beyond the end of a document or webpage. Licenses for the patent were obtained by Nokia and IBM, and Apple offered a license to Samsung during failed negotiations back in November 2010.

Apple asserted this patent against Samsung as part of its failed attempt to get an injunction against Galaxy devices, and the court order denying the injunction includes general discussion of how past licensing behavior affects the decision of whether or not to grant an injunction. The discussion is nestled among two redacted statements shown to The Verge that confirm the '381 patent was licensed to IBM and Nokia, and that Apple offered a license to Samsung in November of 2010 as part of settlement negotiations.

At first blush, the revelation suggests that because Apple is indeed willing to offer licensing for certain iOS features rather going to the "thermonuclear war" extreme, its case may be strengthened by Samsung's refusal to purchase a license as other companies have done.

But the fact that Apple has been willing to license the feature to other companies for monetary compensation also undermines its argument that it is being irreparably harmed by Samsung's alleged infringement. In Koh's view, if Apple could be adequately compensated for the infringement through a license by Samsung, Apple could be made whole at a later date without the need for a preliminary injunction at this point in the trial.

Popular Stories

iPhone SE 4 Thumb 1

'New' iPhone SE Product Listing Appears on French Website

Wednesday February 12, 2025 6:49 am PST by
As the wait continues for Apple's long-rumored, fourth-generation iPhone SE, French electronics retailer Boulanger has prematurely published a product listing for a "new" model of the iPhone SE. The placeholder page says the device is "coming soon," but it offers no further information, and the price shown is obviously not real. The listing was spotted by a reader of the French technology...
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...
oppo find n5 fingers

World's Thinnest Foldable Phone Launches Next Week

Monday February 10, 2025 3:05 am PST by
Oppo has confirmed a February 20 global launch for its Find N5, which the company claims is the world's thinnest device in the foldable phone category. The phone is expected to be re-branded as the OnePlus Open 2 in the US. The Chinese vendor has been teasing the device in the last few weeks, touting its waterproofing and nearly invisible display crease, and highlighting its thinness by compa...
m2 macbook air blue

M4 MacBook Air Release Continues to Appear Imminent

Monday February 10, 2025 10:56 am PST by
There continue to be signs of a new MacBook Air with an M4 chip, indicating that we could see the machine launch in the not too distant future. A private account on X today shared the identifiers that the MacBook Air will use, and those identifiers correspond to the M4 chip. According to the source, both the 13-inch MacBook Air and the 15-inch MacBook Air will be equipped with Apple's...
watchOS 11 Thumb 2 1

Apple Releases watchOS 11.3.1

Monday February 10, 2025 10:04 am PST by
Apple today released watchOS 11.3.1, a minor update to the operating system that runs on the Apple Watch. watchOS 11.3.1 is compatible with the Apple Watch Series 6 and later, all Apple Watch Ultra models, and the Apple Watch SE 2. watchOS 11.3.1 can be downloaded by opening up the Apple Watch app and going to General > Software Update. To install the new software, the Apple Watch needs to...
sequoia

Apple Releases macOS Sequoia 15.3.1

Monday February 10, 2025 10:11 am PST by
Apple today released macOS Sequoia 15.3.1, a minor update to the macOS Sequoia operating system that came out last September. macOS 15.3.1 comes a few weeks after the launch of macOS Sequoia 15.3. Mac users can download the ‌‌‌macOS Sequoia‌‌‌ update through the Software Update section of System Settings. Apple has also released macOS 13.7.4 and macOS 14.7.4 for those who are...
Apple Ad on X

Apple Resumes Advertising on X

Wednesday February 12, 2025 2:18 pm PST by
Apple this month started advertising on X for the first time in more than a year. The company had stopped advertising on the social media platform in November 2023 following controversial remarks made by its owner Elon Musk. For example, the @Apple account is running an ad promoting Safari's privacy features. The ad was spotted by MacRumors contributor Aaron Perris. The @AppleTV account has a...
M4 mini Glowing Blue

Apple Begins Selling Refurbished M4 Macs

Wednesday February 12, 2025 11:35 am PST by
Apple today added MacBook Pro and Mac mini models with M4 series chips to its certified refurbished store in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Ireland for the first time since the computers were introduced in October 2024. Some refurbished MacBook Pro models with M4 chips are also available in Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, and select other European countries. ...
pixelmator pro apple acquisition complete

Apple Completes Pixelmator Acquisition

Tuesday February 11, 2025 9:34 am PST by
Pixelmator last year announced that it was being acquired by Apple, and today the company confirmed that the acquisition has been completed after Apple received regulatory approval. The Pixelmator for iOS, Pixelmator Pro, and Photomator apps were today updated with a new splash screen announcing the deal. Pixelmator is a well-known image and photo editing app that competes with Photoshop and ...

Top Rated Comments

AAPLaday Avatar
172 months ago
Hopefully these guys will call a truce for xmas and have a football match instead
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Oletros Avatar
172 months ago
Well done Samsung keep on fighting the trolls.

What trolls?
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
kdarling Avatar
172 months ago
Here is my first reading of the judge's decision (http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/candce/5:2011cv01846/239768/452/)to not grant a preliminary injunction at Apple's request, which was based on two iPhone design patents, one iPad design patent, and one utility patent (the snapback one). Corrections welcomed.

---- PHONE DESIGN PATENTS

Apple's lawyers tried to claim that similar designs would have a product dilution affect, an idea which is ripped off from trademark law, and which Koh said is not normally applied to design patents.

Both design patents were limited because Apple had only patented the front, although of course now they were belatedly trying to claim side and back as well.

The first 2007 iPhone design patent ('087) was found to not count, because a 2005 Sharp Japanese design patent proved prior art:



The other one ('677) was challenged on account of functionality. The court noted that a minimalist design is that way specifically because it is all functional, not decorative. (Note: a design patent can ONLY patent decorative items.)

In addition, placement of speaker and screen is obvious. Still, the court felt that the Samsung design might infringe it due to the full sized black screen even though the details were different (home buttons, etc).

However, Apple did not prove that irreparable harm would occur for many reasons, including:

1) Apple's claim that Samsung had been copying them since 2007. Naturally, the fact that Apple waited until 2011 to sue Samsung over the design, didn't convince the court that such copying could cause irreparable harm... since Apple failed to complain during the first four years.

2) Another factor was that the court decided that if Samsung's devices were not sold, the real benefactor of an injunction would not be Apple, but the other manufacturers of smartphones (e.g HTC and LG).

---- TABLET DESIGN PATENT

Again, functionality was a major consideration, just as it was in the Netherlands judgement.

Moreover, the court saw too much prior art (e.g the 1994 Knight-Ridder concept and the TC1000 tablet).

Therefore the court found that Apple had failed to establish that it was likely to be able to prove the iPad's design patent validity in court.

As for irreparable harm, the court said that even if Samsung infringed (the possibly invalid patent), Apple had failed to prove that the iPad's physical design was the deciding factor for buyers... especially with prior art showing that the shape isn't what makes the iPad sell so well; it is the UI, apps and price.

---- SNAPBACK UI PATENT

Again, prior art was introduced, along with a Samsung intimation that perhaps Apple had deliberately withheld some of it from the USPTO. The judge disagreed.

The judge ruled that Apple could probably prove its validity and that Samsung likely infringed on this patent. However, it was not critical enough a smartphone patent to be grounds for an injunction.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ChazUK Avatar
172 months ago
It's the same thing they did with the photo gallery app and were found in infringement in the Netherlands for. They went back to the stock Android behavior to circumvent the ban in the end.

The fact that they're intentionally changing the way that the stock applications behave to act like iOS counterparts is very discouraging from my perspective.

Hopefully this will lead to Samsung leaving things alone or coming up with alternative methods rather than trying to emulate competitors.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
gnasher729 Avatar
172 months ago
Are we all supposed to be impressed by your amazing command of the English Language and hit the thumbs up button on your post to make you feel superior???

OK, congratulations, you've corrected a grammatical error on an Internet Blog.
All those readers who don't use English as their first language appreciate such corrections very much. It used to be that reading a lot would give you a good command of the English language eventually; on the internet that is unfortunately not so. So _I_ am not impressed, but I appreciate the effort. And every little bit helps.


Overscroll on a washer/dryer or microwave... Intriguing ! :p
The next time you eat tomato soup, try stirring it, then take the spoon out and watch carefully: Just before the soup comes to rest, it actually rotates back a bit. Nowadays this is called "overscroll" :-)
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
KnightWRX Avatar
172 months ago
Good, let these things proceed to trial and the parties being found guilty of infringement before any punishements are dished out.

This goes for both sides. All this injunction non-sense only hurts the consumer in the end.

Also good to know Apple is opening up to the idea of licensing their patents instead of hoarding them all and using them as a competitive edge only. Other parties are open to these cross-license agreements and in the end, the consumer wins.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)