Court grants Samsung request to expedite Galaxy Nexus injunction appeal

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Friday issued an order stating that the body has acquiesced to Samsung's motion to fast-track an appeal of a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Nexus.he .

The decision to push-up the appeal bodes well for the South Korean company, reports FOSS Patent's Florian Mueller, as the related Apple v. Samsung federal lawsuit is scheduled to start some two years from now, meaning an unresolved injunction appeal could keep Nexus units off shelves for the duration.

Samsung now has until July 16 to file its court brief which will be followed by an Apple response by July 30 and subsequent reply from the Galaxy maker before August 6.

Apple first won the preliminary injunction in late June after it successfully leveraged a unified search patent but Samsung filed for a stay of the sales ban with both the California District Court and the CAFC. District Judge Lucy Koh, who handed down the injunction ruling, denied the motion to stay on July 3, but the CAFC granted an identical motion less than a week later.

The brief two-page order does not state how long Samsung's stay will last ahead of the official appeal hearings but Mueller believes a decision regarding the matter will be handed down late Friday or early next week.

CAFC Order


Also accepted by the CAFC was Sprint and Google's amici curiae briefs against Apple's sales ban. Apple pointed out that Google should not be considered an amicus curiae, or friend of the court, as the internet search giant is both the developer of Android and worked extensively with Samsung on development of the Galaxy Nexus. The iPhone maker went on to point out that Google is represented in district court by the same law firm as Samsung and claimed the Mountain View, Calif., company retained the services of a different firm for the federal suit in an attempt to conceal this fact.

The day was not completely Samsung's favor, however, as it was ordered Apple's sur-reply to the motion to stay will be considered.

From the sur-reply:
"Samsung, in its reply brief, has not disputed that immediate enforcement of the injunction would result in no irreparable harm to Samsung. In the absence of such harm to the moving party, there is no conceivable basis for issuing a stay of the injunction. Without addressing that fundamental point, Samsung?s reply focuses solely on supposed harms to third parties, which do not and cannot warrant a stay pending appeal. See, e.g., Apple's Response to Sprint's Motion for Leave to Participate as Amicus Curiae.

To support its new theory, Samsung seizes upon a letter that Apple sent to various carriers and retailers, informing them of the injunction and asking them to discontinue the sale of infringing Galaxy Nexus devices. That Apple would inform others of the entry of the injunction could not have come as any surprise to Samsung given Apple?s continued efforts to enforce its intellectual property rights. Moreover, Apple?s letter shows nothing beyond the entirely predictable consequence of Samsung's infringement--i.e., the infringing products must be taken off of the market. It is not a legally cognizable harm to halt downstream sales of stolen, pirated, counterfeit, or infringing products.

In any event, as the court below and this Court have repeatedly found, the mere fact that third parties might face a disruption in their efforts to distribute infringing products is absolutely irrelevant at the stay stage. Because Samsung is the moving party seeking a stay, Samsung has the burden of proving that it would be irreparably harmed in the absence of an injunction. Although harms to third parties (and the public at large) might be considered when addressing the 'public interest' factor, a belated submission on that single factor does not satisfy Samsung's heavy burden of showing that a stay is necessary to protect its own interests. Indeed, in the absence of irreparable harm to Samsung—which Samsung now concedes--no stay may issue regardless of all the other factors.

Samsung's motion to stay the preliminary injunction should be denied."
While the motions and replies have been accepted, the court must now decide on whether to agree to any or all terms set forth by parties.
«13456

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 119
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    This for the guys responsible for a 700 point questionnaire.
  • Reply 2 of 119


    Thanks for giving the Galaxy Nexus even more publicity Apple.


     


    Now that you're trying to ban it, people want it even more.

  • Reply 3 of 119
    galbigalbi Posts: 968member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    Thanks for giving the Galaxy Nexus even more publicity Apple.


     


    Now that you're trying to ban it, people want it even more.





    I just placed my order for one. :D


     


    Thanks Apple. :D

  • Reply 4 of 119
    just_mejust_me Posts: 590member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post




    I just placed my order for one. :D


     


    Thanks Apple. :D



    Isnt the SG3 better or does JB make that much of a difference?

  • Reply 5 of 119

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post


    Isnt the SG3 better or does JB make that much of a difference?



    The SG3 has better hardware. That's the phone I would recommend to anyone who wants to renew their contract.


     


    But if you're already on one, $349 still gets you excellent hardware with the latest AOSP release of Jelly Bean 4.1.1. And the best dev community out of all phones. I was able to get my Galaxy Nexus to run Ubuntu with a bluetooth keyboard and mouse

  • Reply 6 of 119
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member


    This is unsurprising. Any company would seek a swift appeal when it relates to a flagship product.

  • Reply 7 of 119


    A universal search patent that should of never been granted. 


     


    How I would fix, the software patent issue. 


     


    1. Patent office needs better funding so they don't have to depend of the filing of patents to keep them functioning. How it works now is all you need is a piece of paper a thought and some money and the patent office will grant you a patent.


     


    2. Software patents needs to fall under a different catogory  from other patents. Currently that is not the case. 


     


    3. Software patents needs to have a limit of 5 years. 3 for exclusive use of that patent by the patent maker and 2 where that  software patent maker must make it available to others at a cost. After 5 years that software patent gets open sourced.


     


    4. An infringement of 1 software patent cannot lead to the ban of a product, it needs to be multiple. (frand patents should not carry a ban at all, and frand payments should be outlined by the state not the Frand patent holder I'm looking at you samdung and Moto.)


     


    So in conclusion. Better funding of the Patent Office, create software patents (they currently don't exist), 5 year limit of software patents, and no product can be banned without multiple software patent violations (around 5-7)


     


    Do that and innovation moves at a faster rate.


     


     


    Tune in next time for "How to solve FRAND abuse" 

  • Reply 8 of 119
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    The SG3 has better hardware. That's the phone I would recommend to anyone who wants to renew their contract.

    But if you're already on one, $349 still gets you excellent hardware with the latest AOSP release of Jelly Bean 4.1.1.

    Which will make you one of the 7 people on the planet who have been able to upgrade to the latest version of Android.
  • Reply 9 of 119
    s4boness4bones Posts: 22member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    Thanks for giving the Galaxy Nexus even more publicity Apple.


     


    Now that you're trying to ban it, people want it even more.



    exactly why i will never buy another Samsung product again.

  • Reply 10 of 119

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    Which will make you one of the 7 people on the planet who have been able to upgrade to the latest version of Android.


    7?


     


    Let's see. The device is available on a ton of carriers world wide, available at Sprint and Verizon in the US, and they're also available at 349 off contract for any GSM carrier.


     


    If you're trying to take a stab at fragmentation, then that's why you buy a Nexus device. People who truly care about updates for Android accept this and buy a Nexus phone. If they still care and want different hardware, then they already know they have to wait for manufacturers and carriers to push out the updates later. 


     


    There are no apps that are designed only for Jelly Bean. I don't see the problem.

  • Reply 11 of 119

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    Thanks for giving the Galaxy Nexus even more publicity Apple.


     


    Now that you're trying to ban it, people want it even more.



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post




    I just placed my order for one. :D


     


    Thanks Apple. :D



     


    If I had a dollar for every time someone said this...


     


    You know how you can tell the fandroids vastly outnumber the Apple fanboys in online discussions? Posts like these. All I see (esp on sites like EG) are countless people who swear they will never buy Apple again and are going to rush out and buy a Samsung/HTC/LG device.


     


    So how come the majority of posters will never buy Apple yet Apple continues to post record sales? Oh yeah, the people commenting don't represent the population as a whole.

  • Reply 12 of 119

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MaroonMushroom View Post


    There are no apps that are designed only for Jelly Bean. I don't see the problem.



     


    Exactly. No developer is going to waste time developing for a platform that has such a small user base. Which is why most Android develoeprs code for an earlier API level to guarantee compatibility with most users. And why most Android Apps don't even take advantage of all the additional features/abilities in ICS or JB.

  • Reply 13 of 119
    Thanks for giving the Galaxy Nexus even more publicity Apple.

    Now that you're trying to ban it, people want it even more.

    Nope. And nope.
  • Reply 14 of 119
    red oakred oak Posts: 629member
    Samsung...Google's little software whore. The whore makes some money but it is unsustainable over the medium and long term, terms of the interaction are dictated, no input on timing, and no control over the features or acts performed

    The John is allowed unlimited engagement and frequency with other partners. And (now) The John has stay home entity (Motorola) to f*** around with in-house under a one cost, unlimited use model

    Engagement (e.g. affection) is spread amount many - ASUS, Motorola, HTC. Allegiance to none..

    The John rotates through them all
  • Reply 15 of 119
    69ergoo69ergoo Posts: 42member


    it's quite simple. Apple will be screwed in Korea. Samsung will be screwed in U.S. It's common sense that the legal system of any nation will favor it's own company over a foreign entity. you're a moron if you believe the U.S. courts will damage Apple's business and hand over the entire U.S. market to Samsung. As time passes, it's the Koreans who will get more desperate because Samsung is practically HALF of the entire Korean economy. If Samsung gets screwed, the entire Korean nation will be screwed.


    If apple gets screwed, who cares? There are hundreds of gigantic global money making machines in the U.S. that can step up and replace Apple any time. Korea doesn't have this luxury...entire nation depends on Samsung and maybe Hyundai, LG? 3 companies, that's it. 

  • Reply 16 of 119
    lerxtlerxt Posts: 182member
    I would bet anything that samsung have employed a legion of people to post on these forums to write pro Samsung posts.
  • Reply 17 of 119

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lerxt View Post



    I would bet anything that samsung have employed a legion of people to post on these forums to write pro Samsung posts.


    Or maybe people like the Galaxy Nexus?

  • Reply 18 of 119
    red oakred oak Posts: 629member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 69ergoo View Post


    it's quite simple. Apple will be screwed in Korea. Samsung will be screwed in U.S. It's common sense that the legal system of any nation will favor it's own company over a foreign entity. you're a moron if you believe the U.S. courts will damage Apple's business and hand over the entire U.S. market to Samsung. As time passes, it's the Koreans who will get more desperate because Samsung is practically HALF of the entire Korean economy. If Samsung gets screwed, the entire Korean nation will be screwed.


    If apple gets screwed, who cares? There are hundreds of gigantic global money making machines in the U.S. that can step up and replace Apple any time. Korea doesn't have this luxury...entire nation depends on Samsung and maybe Hyundai, LG? 3 companies, that's it. 



     


    Good ideas  


     


    But the same (nearly) situation existed with Nokia and look how that played out.  That said, I think Koreans are more protective, even though they will go ahead and continue to flood the US market with low quality, low cost cars  

  • Reply 19 of 119
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    69ergoo wrote: »
    It's common sense that the legal system of any nation will favor it's own company over a foreign entity. you're a moron if you believe the U.S. courts will damage Apple's business and hand over the entire U.S. market to Samsung.

    That's a pessimistic and inaccurate assumptions about how the law works throughout the world. While it's certainly possible for nationalistic views to lead to a conscious bias you're a moron to deny that the law will always protect the big US companies over anything or anyone else.

    You're also forgetting that profits made in the US are taxed in the US. Same goes for Korea. That means there is no winner-takes-all scenario in saying that one countries court of law can't rule in favour of another country's companies or citizen.

    red oak wrote: »
    But the same (nearly) situation existed with Nokia and look how that played out.  That said, I think Koreans are more protective, even though they will go ahead and continue to flood the US market with low quality, low cost cars  

    Is Nokia at least doing well in Finland in unit sales? I think the iPhone is still the most popular handset in Japan and the iPhone was the fastest selling handset n Korea which is pretty crazy considering all I kept hearing for years was how far ahead of the iPhone those countries were because they had TV tuners and thousands of secret key combinations.
  • Reply 20 of 119
    2stepbay2stepbay Posts: 110member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post




    I just placed my order for one. :D


     


    Thanks Apple. :D



    So you have absolutely no qualms about purchasing stolen property. Dude, you need a reality checkup. BTW...karma...directly or indirectly triggered is always a bitch.

Sign In or Register to comment.