Apple appeals denied injunction of Samsung Galaxy sales in the US

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Apple has appealed its case for a preliminary injunction against four Samsung Galaxy devices to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the U.S., with one legal expert claiming Apple stands a "pretty good chance" of convincing the court to overturn at least some parts of the original ruling.



The Cupertino, Calif., company submitted its appeal earlier this week, as discovered by FOSS Patents blogger Florian Mueller.



The filing takes issue with District Judge Lucy Koh's Dec. 2 ruling that denied Apple's request for a preliminary injunction of Samsung's Droid Charge, Galaxy S 4G, Infuse 4G and Galaxy Tab 10.1 devices.



Mueller asserted the opinion that Apple is "doing the absolutely right thing" with the appeal and went on to note that Koh's analysis of the situation appears "fundamentally flawed" to him. Though he did say that Koh's finding that Apple didn't show an entitlement to injunctive relief was "somewhat conclusory," he disagreed with her assessment and definition of the "relevant market and competitive dynamics."



"Apple has a pretty good chance here that the Federal Circuit will find some serious flaws in Judge Koh's reasoning on the equitable factors. A critical reader of her ruling can't help but conclude that her denial of injunctive relief is not well-reasoned to say the least," he wrote.



Additionally, Mueller suggested that the Court of Appeals would be concerned with the "incredibly high bar" that Koh set for injunctions, both preliminary and permanent. Though an overturning of an injunction denial is not a common occurrence, he did say that it's "very likely" that at least some of the judge's arguments would be reversed. The appeals court could, for example, correct any flaws in the ruling and remand it to Koh for reconsideration, the report noted.



Any improvements to Apple's situation would have a bearing not just on the preliminary injunction segment of the case, but also the main proceeding to discuss a permanent injunction scheduled for a trial next summer.



Assuming that the Court of Appeals decides to hear Apple's appeal, the process would take "a number of months," Muller said, adding that a decision should arrive before Koh rules on a permanent injunction.



Mueller even speculated that Apple could get support during the appeal in the form of curiae briefs from other patent holders due to concerns that Koh's ruling could give infringers a "license of right" or "compulsory license."



Apple has already won a permanent ban on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet in Germany, where, according to Mueller, injunctions are automatically triggered upon infringement of valid patents. Samsung has responded by making slight modifications to the device's design and re-releasing it in the country as the Galaxy Tab 10.1N.



In fact, Apple has even offered possible alternative designs to Samsung that would help it avoid violating its patents. The iPad maker provided suggestions such as using a non-black front surface, varying the bezel size, or introducing a "cluttered appearance."



Illustration from court brief comparing iPad and Galaxy Tab profiles | Source: The Verge



However, Apple was unsatisfied with the changes Samsung made for the Galaxy Tab 10.1N and has since asked the German court to also block sales of that device. The new 10.1N features a metal frame that wraps around its edges.



The redesigned Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1N is shown up top. Via Mobiflip.de.



Apple and Samsung are locked in a tense legal dispute that began back in April. The disagreement has since spread to over 20 complaints spanning 10 countries.



Samsung recently won a reprieve from an Apple victory that had caused a two-month ban on sales of its Galaxy Tab 10.1 in Australia. The device has been approved for sale in the country and is expected to hit the market next Monday, though Apple has appealed the reversal.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    Lol, Just hire Florian Mueller to write for AppleInsider already! He can join other staff writers Shaw Wu and Astok Kumar
  • Reply 2 of 31
    Florian Mueller thinks highly of Apple's chances? Say it aint so.



    As soon as I read the "one legal expert" I just knew it was Florian Mueller. For clarity, do we have any other "legal experts" that agree with FM or are there any legal experts with an opposite view at all?

    I understand the reporting bias at AI but It'd be nice to get the whole picture.



    The thing withall experts, analysts and ponderers is that no one fires back at them when they get it wrong (oracle Smokong Gun post by FM anyone?)
  • Reply 3 of 31
    nairbnairb Posts: 253member
    Regardless of who is right or wrong in all this patent crap, one thing is sure - procedures take way too long, both in the US and elsewhere. Preliminary hearings, preliminary rulings, appeals, appeals, appeals, hearings, appeals, appeals, appeals. Does not matter what the result is there are always multiple appeals.



    If a company starts infringing or is accused of infringing half way through a patents enforceable lifespan, the patent has almost expired before all this crap is over.



    There needs to be a way of speeding up the process.
  • Reply 4 of 31
    Korean patriotism lies in blood, not citizenship.
  • Reply 5 of 31
    cash907cash907 Posts: 893member
    In other news, Hanes has announced it's lawsuit against Fruit of the Loom, and demanding an immediate injunction baring them from selling white T-shirts and tighty whities. Other than the label, could you tell the difference between the two? IP infringement!!!!
  • Reply 6 of 31
    I've never understood the supposed ban on Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales in Germany. The 10.1 has always been available (and still is) on Amazon.de ... now alongside the 10.1n ... not a very effective injunction.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    Wondering if one of these spats will ever appear in an episode of "The Good Wife"?
  • Reply 8 of 31
    I guess the courts think that industrial design is easy and worthless, so there's no point in preventing lazier companies from copying successful products, essentially stealing sales by tricking gullible people into buying their clones. Caveat Emptor rules... A pretty sad commentary on our patent courts, which I thought were to protect the people who invested the efforts to create the successful products.
  • Reply 9 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post


    In other news, Hanes has announced it's lawsuit against Fruit of the Loom, and demanding an immediate injunction baring them from selling white T-shirts and tighty whities. Other than the label, could you tell the difference between the two? IP infringement!!!!



    did you just compare fashion with tech??

    i speak no americano (by the way, nice song) but dude come on… speak some sense.
  • Reply 10 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fotoformat View Post


    Wondering if one of these spats will ever appear in an episode of "The Good Wife"?



    I thought the same thing!
  • Reply 11 of 31
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GalaxyTab View Post


    Florian Mueller thinks highly of Apple's chances? Say it aint so.



    As soon as I read the "one legal expert" I just knew it was Florian Mueller. For clarity, do we have any other "legal experts" that agree with FM or are there any legal experts with an opposite view at all?

    I understand the reporting bias at AI but It'd be nice to get the whole picture.



    The thing withall experts, analysts and ponderers is that no one fires back at them when they get it wrong (oracle Smokong Gun post by FM anyone?)



    I'm sure you could recommend someone for "the whole picture". And the Oracle/Google thing hasn't come close to playing out yet, so your proclamation about the Java license email is a tad premature. You'd probably know that if you read more FM.
  • Reply 12 of 31
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,301member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheMacadvocate View Post


    I'm sure you could recommend someone for "the whole picture". And the Oracle/Google thing hasn't come close to playing out yet, so your proclamation about the Java license email is a tad premature. You'd probably know that if you read more FM.



    IMO, Groklaw has a more complete/balanced set of articles on the Oracle/Google situation, especially combined with a few of Florian's details. Note that the folks at Groklaw.com are lawyers while Florian is a legal observer.



    EDIT: As an aside, Mr. Mueller has had a very long history with Microsoft and recently acknowledged he's in their employ on a new project. To be fair he claims that it doesn't color his opinions posted at FOSSPatents. Personally I seriously question that considering there's very newsworthy legal issues going on between Microsoft and Barnes & Noble that he's not posted details of. Rather than the pushover MS might have expected, B&N has put up an excellent defense so far. From appearances there may be some shady things going on over at MS that Florian seems to wish to avoid a mention of.



    "The International Trade Commission has granted [PDF, 70 pages] Barnes & Noble's request that the ITC recommend that Barnes & Noble be granted international assistance from the Ministry of Justice of Finland under Article 3 of the Hague Convention to obtain testimony from Stephen Elop, CEO of Nokia, and other key executives of the company, as well as help to obtain certain documentary evidence, like the signed agreements between the three entities Microsoft, Nokia and MOSAID.



    The ITC also granted Barnes & Noble's request for permission to seek evidence from MOSAID Technologies, a Canadian corporation, via a letter rogatory. The Administrative Law Judge ruled [PDF] that it was evidence that is "reasonably necessary to investigate fully Barnes & Noble's affirmative defense of patent misuse against" Microsoft, so he recommended to the US District Court for the District of Columbia that it issue the letter rogatory."

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...11208101818692



    Back to live programming now.
  • Reply 13 of 31
    I haven't looked up on this, but the judges name would obviously make her oriental, but maybe still having ties to Asia or even South Korea which would skew the trial.
  • Reply 14 of 31
    I recall informing someone on this board of their ignorance towards the legal system. That thread turned into 160 plus diatribe of nothing where everyone rehashed pics of prior case designs.



    As I stated before, the person is ignorant of corporate law.
  • Reply 15 of 31
    arasuarasu Posts: 32member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by btonedem View Post


    Korean patriotism lies in blood, not citizenship.



    Very well said.
  • Reply 16 of 31
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by btonedem View Post


    Korean patriotism lies in blood, not citizenship.



    What a disgusting and ridiculously racist viewpoint. It's views like these that led to the internment of Japanese Americans and Canadians during World War II.
  • Reply 17 of 31
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arasu View Post


    Very well said.



    Let me guess. You believe in racial profiling too?
  • Reply 18 of 31
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post




    The Cupertino, Calif., company submitted its appeal earlier this week, as discovered by FOSS Patents blogger Florian Mueller.






    Maybe Apple will learn that it is not how many lawyers you pay that makes the difference, but instead, the determining factor is whether you have any legal grounds to stand on.



    Spending money on lawyers != having a good case.
  • Reply 19 of 31
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Wow. I can't believe the comments on here. Rule against Apple and it's not a professional judgement but a decision based on tribal ties. What a disgustingly racist viewpoint. Some of you need to give your heads a shake.
  • Reply 20 of 31
    conradjoeconradjoe Posts: 1,887member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zachkolk View Post


    I haven't looked up on this, but the judges name would obviously make her oriental, but maybe still having ties to Asia or even South Korea which would skew the trial.



Sign In or Register to comment.