Judge denies Apple request to stop Galaxy sales in U.S.

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple's arguments for a preliminary injunction to block sales of certain Samsung Galaxy products in the U.S. failed, delivering a blow to the iPad maker's position in the ongoing global patent dispute.



In a late Friday ruling it was announced that Apple's request for an early U.S. ban on certain Samsung mobile devices was shot down by District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, reports Reuters.



Koh denied Apple's bid to stop the sale of the Droid Charge, Galaxy S 4G, Infuse 4G and Galaxy Tab 10.1 in the U.S.



"It is not clear that an injunction on Samsung's accused devices would prevent Apple from being irreparably harmed," Koh wrote.



The ruling is not the end of the lawsuit, and Koh noted that Apple was likely to prove that Samsung infringed on at least one tablet patent. She goes on to say, however, that the Cupertino, Calif. tech giant still needs to prove the patent's validity, something it had not shown thus far.



Kristin Huguet, spokeswoman for Apple, reiterated previous statements saying that Samsung's "blatant copying is wrong." Samsung did not immediately issue a statement.



The news is the latest development in the ongoing legal war between the rival handset and tablet makers, which now spans across 10 countries and includes over 20 separate cases. Apple initially sued Samsung in April, claiming that the Galaxy line of mobile products copied the look and feel of the iPhone and the iPad.



Most recently, a preliminary injunction against Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 was overturned in Australia, though Apple won a week-long extension on the ban to file an appeal. The iPhone maker is waiting to see if its application will be granted by the High Court.

«13456714

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 274
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Bravo... Team America F%CK YEAH!





    (...it's only a matter of time before cooler legal heads around the world put an end to all this anti-competitve nonsense, and the consumer can decide what they want to spend their money on)



    While Apple has yet to comment on the ruling, Samsung has issued an official statement:



    "Samsung welcomes today's ruling denying Apple's request for a preliminary injunction. This ruling confirms our long-held view that Apple's arguments lack merit. In particular, the court has recognized that Samsung has raised substantial questions about the validity of certain Apple design patents. We are confident that we can demonstrate the distinctiveness of Samsung's mobile devices when the case goes to trial next year. We will continue to assert our intellectual property rights and defend against Apple's claims to ensure our continued ability to provide innovative mobile products to consumers."



    For those interested, here's a brief rundown:



    Design Patent D618,677: asserted against Samsung's Galaxy S and Infuse smartphones.

    - Likely valid.

    - Likely infringed.

    - No irreparable harm to Apple.



    Design Patent D593,087: asserted against Samsung's Galaxy S and Infuse smartphones.

    - Likely invalid.

    - Likely infringed.

    - No irreparable harm to Apple.



    Design Patent D504,889: asserted against Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1.

    - Likely invalid in light of Knight Ridder prior art.

    - Likely infringed.

    - Likely irreparable harm to Apple. (See NOTE below)



    Patent 7,469,381: software patent on scrolling behavior asserted against Samsung's Galaxy S, Infuse, Droid Charge and Galaxy Tab 10.1.

    - Likely valid.

    - Likely infringed.

    - No irreparable harm to Apple.



    NOTE: The one Apple design patent on tablets that was ruled both 'likely infringed by Samsung' and causing 'irreparable harm' was the result of the current lack of viable market competitors, but the court also said the patent itself was likely invalid due to prior art.



    http://www.paleofuture.com/blog/2007...aper-1994.html
  • Reply 2 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Bravo... Team America F%CK YEAH!





    (...it's only a matter of time before cooler legal heads around the world put an end to all this anti-competitve nonsense, and the consumer can decide what they want to spend their money on)



    You're not that bright. This is round one. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals [9th Circuit] routinely overturns the District Court of San Francisco.
  • Reply 3 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    You're not that bright. This is round one. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals [9th Circuit] routinely overturns the District Court of San Francisco.



    That is something that may/may not happen.
  • Reply 4 of 274
    cash907cash907 Posts: 893member
    Awww.. you mean Apple is going to have to compete outside the courts this time? Poor Cupertino.
  • Reply 5 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Bravo... Team America F%CK YEAH!





    (...it's only a matter of time before cooler legal heads around the world put an end to all this anti-competitve nonsense, and the consumer can decide what they want to spend their money on)



    Hooray!



    Now Apple can start competing and innovating. Finally.
  • Reply 6 of 274
    Samsung is obviously copying Apple and deserves to be punished. Boycott them now and for a long time.
  • Reply 7 of 274
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ElectroTech View Post


    Samsung is obviously copying Apple and deserves to be punished. Boycott them now and for a long time.



    Apple is obviously just being anti-competitve, abusing the legal system to try and block competitors for frivolous reasons. Boycott Them!
  • Reply 8 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robodude View Post


    Hooray!



    Now Apple can start competing and innovating. Finally.



    One of the more stupidest comments I've read today.

    Roll your eyes at my middle finger!

    Before the iPad there weren't any tablets on the market now there are dozens!!!!

    And Apple doesn't have to originate a product to compete in that product category. Get your game right. But sadly it may be too late.
  • Reply 9 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by maccherry View Post


    One of the more stupidest comments I've read today.

    Roll your eyes at my middle finger!

    Before the iPad there weren't any tablets on the market now there are dozens!!!!

    And Apple doesn't have to originate a product to compete in that product category. Get your game right. But sadly it may be too late.



    I was being sarcastic. Aim your misdirected rage elsewhere.



    There were tablets before the iPad btw. I guess you can only fight a crap argument with more crap.
  • Reply 10 of 274
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,479member
    Part of competing is defending your intellectual property in court. If you don't defend yourself everyone just copies you without doing any research of their own. To suggest that defending ones intellectual property is anti-competitive is nonsense from people who don't understand the concept research and development. Should you ever spend a significant amount of time and money creating something, you'll understand the concept of intellectual property the moment someone rips you off.
  • Reply 11 of 274
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,360member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post


    Part of competing is defending your intellectual property in court. If you don't defend yourself everyone just copies you without doing any research of their own. To suggest that defending ones intellectual property is anti-competitive is nonsense from people who don't understand the concept research and development. Should you ever spend a significant amount of time and money creating something, you'll understand the concept of intellectual property the moment someone rips you off.



    What you write is true. There are a lot of ignorant people bandying about the ludicrous and false notion that Apple is being anti-competitive for simply protecting it's intellectual property.
  • Reply 12 of 274
    Quote:

    delivering a critical blow



    Sheesh, you'd think AI was narrating a boxing match
  • Reply 13 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ElectroTech View Post


    Samsung is obviously copying Apple and deserves to be punished. Boycott them now and for a long time.



    Does this include any Apple gear with Samsung components in them?



    Time to get rid of your Apple gear if so.
  • Reply 14 of 274
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Apple is obviously just being anti-competitve, abusing the legal system to try and block competitors for frivolous reasons. Boycott Them!



    I wish you would. You can prove it by not posting your proof to insecurity photos.
  • Reply 15 of 274
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,479member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    What you write is true. There are a lot of ignorant people bandying about the ludicrous and false notion that Apple is being anti-competitive for simply protecting it's intellectual property.



    Robbing a bank, the ignorant people understand. Robbing a design, they're clueless.
  • Reply 16 of 274
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    I wish you would. You can prove it by not posting your proof to insecurity photos.



    Aweeee... Someone's jealous again.
  • Reply 17 of 274
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by maccherry View Post


    Before the iPad there weren't any tablets on the market now there are dozens!!!!



    Really... "Before the iPad there weren't any tablets on the market"?



    FACT: There were many tablets/MIDS on the market long before the iPad, most of which it happens to share many design elements, it's just that the iPad just made tablets more consumer friendly.



  • Reply 18 of 274
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,117member
    DaHarder has been a troll like forever. Don't waste your time responding to his post. Put him on your ignore list to avoid his rants.
  • Reply 19 of 274
    arasuarasu Posts: 32member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple's arguments for a preliminary injunction to block sales of certain Samsung Galaxy products in the U.S. failed, delivering a blow to the iPad maker's position in the ongoing global patent dispute.







    Sounds like one of those instances when Steve Jobs would have cried.

  • Reply 20 of 274
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Really... "Before the iPad there weren't any tablets on the market"?



    FACT: There were many tablets/MIDS on the market long before the iPad, most of which it happens to share many design elements, it's just that the iPad just made tablets more consumer friendly.









    I think 2003 one is compaq TC100. It was one of the major reasons that US court opined that Apple's tablet design patent will likely be invalidated.
Sign In or Register to comment.