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

apple tv 4k new orange

New Apple TV Expected Later This Year With These New Features

Saturday July 12, 2025 3:09 pm PDT by
A new Apple TV is expected to be released later this year, and a handful of new features and changes have been rumored for the device. Below, we recap what to expect from the next Apple TV, according to rumors. Rumors Faster Wi-Fi Support The next Apple TV will be equipped with Apple's own combined Wi-Fi and Bluetooth chip, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. He said the chip supports ...
iphone 16 pro ghost hand

5 Reasons to Skip This Year's iPhone 17 Pro

Thursday July 10, 2025 4:54 am PDT by
Apple will launch its new iPhone 17 series in two months, and the iPhone 17 Pro models are expected to get a new design for the rear casing and the camera area. But more significant changes to the lineup are not expected until next year, when the iPhone 18 models arrive. If you're thinking of trading in your iPhone for this year's latest, consider the following features rumored to be coming...
iPhone 17 Pro in Hand Feature Lowgo

iPhone 17 Pro Coming Soon With These 16 New Features

Friday July 11, 2025 12:40 pm PDT by
Apple's next-generation iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max are only two months away, and there are plenty of rumors about the devices. Below, we recap key changes rumored for the iPhone 17 Pro models. Latest Rumors These rumors surfaced in June and July:A redesigned Dynamic Island: It has been rumored that all iPhone 17 models will have a redesigned Dynamic Island interface — it might ...
Apple Watch Ultra 2 Complications

Apple Watch Ultra 3: What to Expect

Sunday July 13, 2025 10:30 am PDT by
The long wait for an Apple Watch Ultra 3 is nearly over, and a handful of new features and changes have been rumored for the device. Below, we recap what to expect from the Apple Watch Ultra 3:Satellite connectivity for sending and receiving text messages when Wi-Fi and cellular coverage is unavailable 5G support, up from LTE on the Apple Watch Ultra 2 Likely a wide-angle OLED display that ...
iphone 16 pro pro max

iPhone 17 Pro Models With BOE Displays Will Be Sold in China Only

Thursday July 10, 2025 11:59 pm PDT by
iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max models with displays made by BOE will be sold exclusively in China, according to a new report. Last week, it emerged that Chinese display manufacturer BOE was aggressively ramping up its OLED production capacity for future iPhone models as part of a plan to recapture a major role in Apple's supply chain. Now, tech news aggregator Jukan Choi reports...
top stories 2025 07 12

Top Stories: iPhone 17 Pro Rumors, iOS 26 Beta 3, and More

Saturday July 12, 2025 6:00 am PDT by
The iOS 26 public beta release is quickly approaching, while developers have recently gotten their hands on a third round of betas that has seen Apple continue to tweak features, design, and functionality. We're also continuing to hear rumors about the iPhone 17 lineup that is now just about right around the corner, while Apple's latest big-budget film appears to be taking off, so read on...

Top Rated Comments

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

What trolls?
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
kdarling Avatar
178 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
178 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
178 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
178 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)