The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today ruled that Judge Lucy Koh, who presides over the Apple v. Samsung case, must reconsider her 2011 decision not to ban Samsung devices that infringed on Apple products, reports The Wall Street Journal.
/article-new/2013/10/apple_samsung_logos.jpg?lossy)
The appeals court ruled unanimously that U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, Calif., made errors last year when she denied Apple's request for a court injunction against 26 Samsung products.
The court said parts of Judge Koh's ruling against Apple were correct, but it said the judge should spend more time considering evidence offered by the iPhone maker to support arguments that Apple is being irreparably harmed by Samsung's patent infringement.
During the original Apple v. Samsung trial, Apple requested an injunction to prevent Samsung from selling its Galaxy line of smartphones and tablets within the United States. Koh denied Apple's request, suggesting there was no evidence Apple would suffer irreparable harm if Samsung was able to continue selling its products.
Koh did issue preliminary injunctions against the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and the Galaxy Tab, but the appeals court later reversed the ban on the Galaxy Nexus.
While today's appeals court ruling upholds Koh's original decision disallowing Apple from requesting an injunction based on design patents, it does allow for a possible injunction on Samsung products based on Apple's utility patents, such as the "Steve Jobs patent" and Apple's "rubber banding" patent covering bounce back.
With both stronger patents and the possibility of an injunction, Apple will have a good case for a Samsung product ban during its second infringement lawsuit that will cover more recent Samsung products like the Galaxy S III, and the Galaxy Note II, among other products. Though the injunction Koh must reconsider dates back to the 2011 lawsuit and covers older products, it would also affect newer devices with a similar infringement pattern.
The second trial will begin in 2014 and is separate from the current ongoing trial, in which Samsung will be forced to pay close to $1 billion in damages following the conclusion of this week's damages retrial.
Top Rated Comments
Are these even products people are buying? Seems stupid to ban older devices.
That's Samsung's strategy.
Do whatever you want, copy whatever you like, and drag it out in the courts until any legal recourse is worthless.
Can't everyone just play nice, please...? This is getting ridiculous.
This is business. And EVERY business (be it Apple or any other) deserves to have its patented technology protected.
Companies spend tens of millions of dollars to bring a product to market and then some people believe they shouldn't fight to protect the patents their products contain? The patents that help make their products unique?
The only thing ridiculous is an attitude like yours. And the very moment it was YOUR patent that was copied, you'd be throwing a hissy fit and calling in the lawyers.
Mark
----------
Can't everyone just play nice, please...? This is getting ridiculous.
Well when Samsung do their own work there won't be anything to go to court over.
Do you think leonardo davinci would just stand aside while someone else copies his mona lisa and start outselling the original?
It is their own work. They take hints from competition. Look at Apple. They took hints from Amazon's Kindle Fire with immense sales. They didn't copy it but they did make a 7" tablet to compete. It's essentially the same situation. You don't see Apple suing Amazon (except for the App Store naming issue).
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Samsung didn't just copy the shape and visual appearance of the iPhone and iPad, Samsung copied software features within iOS. The jury found that Samsung INTENTIONALLY tried to make its products like the iPhone/iPad.
It's NOT "essentially the same situation"! Not even in the same ballpark. Go educate yourself before you embarrass yourself further.
Mark
Samsung copies everyone, I don't see how this is such a complex matter. Anyone with a brain cell can see this.
It is their own work. They take hints from competition. Look at Apple. They took hints from Amazon's Kindle Fire with immense sales. They didn't copy it but they did make a 7" tablet to compete. It's essentially the same situation. You don't see Apple suing Amazon (except for the App Store naming issue).----------
Well when Samsung do their own work there won't be anything to go to court over.
Do you think leonardo davinci would just stand aside while someone else copies his mona lisa and start outselling the original?
Samsung needs Apple for inspiration. A free ride for Samsung's R&D :)
And yet the S3 and S4 look nothing like the iPhone and have been selling incredibly. Please explain...look at how Samsung phones were before the iPhone, they even had a Mac mini clone. :D
Oh - and after that - you can explain how Apple didn't get a "free" ride off of everyone who ever developed a phone and/or smartphone prior to 2007.
Grabs popcorn