Judge vacates and denies Samsung's motion to dissolve U.S. Galaxy Tab ban
Judge Lucy Koh on Monday filed an order denying Samsung's motion to dissolve Apple's sales ban against the Galaxy Tab 10.1, and in doing so vacated the Sept. 20 hearing at which both parties were scheduled to discuss the matter.
After the watershed Apple v. Samsung ruling in August, which found Samsung in violation of six Apple patents, the parties filed post-trial motions appealing some of the jury's decisions. Among the first was Samsung's motion to dissolve a previous U.S. injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1, asserting the sales ban should be lifted as the device was found not in infringement of Apple's D'889 iPad design patent, the basis of the injunction.
In the order, Judge Koh noted that the standing injunction cannot be dissolved by the Court as the sales ban is currently being under appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The judge did rule, however, that "under all circumstances, Samsung?s motion raises a substantial issue, and the Court therefore issues such an indicative ruling."
While Monday's ruling keeps the injunction in place for the moment, there is a possibility that Judge Koh may ultimately have to pass judgment on the issue depending on the appeals court's decision.
Apple and Samsung are slated to meet again in December to argue further injunctions and damages resulting from Apple's landmark win, among other post-trial issues.
After the watershed Apple v. Samsung ruling in August, which found Samsung in violation of six Apple patents, the parties filed post-trial motions appealing some of the jury's decisions. Among the first was Samsung's motion to dissolve a previous U.S. injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1, asserting the sales ban should be lifted as the device was found not in infringement of Apple's D'889 iPad design patent, the basis of the injunction.
In the order, Judge Koh noted that the standing injunction cannot be dissolved by the Court as the sales ban is currently being under appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The judge did rule, however, that "under all circumstances, Samsung?s motion raises a substantial issue, and the Court therefore issues such an indicative ruling."
While Monday's ruling keeps the injunction in place for the moment, there is a possibility that Judge Koh may ultimately have to pass judgment on the issue depending on the appeals court's decision.
Apple and Samsung are slated to meet again in December to argue further injunctions and damages resulting from Apple's landmark win, among other post-trial issues.
Comments
Poor poor sammy. Looks like sammy will have to admit they are wrong. Oh wait they can't. Its not in their DNA. LOL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy
I think eventually they will pull out of the US and make their money somewhere else.
Yeah, that's likely to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy
We are about to find out if Samsung has the ability to innovate to stay in business. But coming from a their society that makes money off of copying other companies products, I doubt it. I think eventually they will pull out of the US and make their money somewhere else.
I doubt they will abandon the U.S. market, it's too tempting. However, what ever they do, and where ever they go, Apple will be there playing whack-a-mole...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack
Samsung has even duplicated the exact dimensions of the corner radii.
Edit: The original iPad seems to be more rounded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy
We are about to find out if Samsung has the ability to innovate to stay in business. But coming from a their society that makes money off of copying other companies products, I doubt it. I think eventually they will pull out of the US and make their money somewhere else.
I think it has more to do with Apple's home court advantage, American's nationalism, and racism than innovation. I'll believe Apple is innovating when Apple designs its own A* chips without Samsung's help.
Remember, Samsung is a $160+B company; not in market value, but in sales. Unfortunately Apple isn't the only US client - AT&T, Verizon, HP, Dell are also among Samsung's top clients.
Seriously what would samsung have had to do for you have considered them copying ...what is it that they did not copy ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
The good news just keeps coming!
Well, I guess then Apple's injunction request will likewise be denied since the case will certainly be under appeal with Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit?
Or maybe not. Considering Koh's lopsided rulings against Samsung last time around, I predict that Apple's injunction will be granted.
As long as it pisses you off, I'll be satisfied.
The past few weeks haven't been kind to the Apple-hating camp, have they?
;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tcasey
Seriously what would samsung have had to do for you have considered them copying
Stuff like S-Voice. Seriously, it's even worse than Siri. At least they haven't removed Google Now from their 4.1 ROMs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR
As long as it pisses you off, I'll be satisfied.
The past few weeks haven't been kind to the Apple-hating camp, have they?
;-)
Why? I'm a Apple investor and making a lot of money off this shenanigan. I predict that this will go on for a while. I'm not selling my shares anytime soon. I win either way.
try harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
I think it has more to do with Apple's home court advantage, American's nationalism, and racism than innovation. I'll believe Apple is innovating when Apple designs its own A* chips without Samsung's help.
Remember, Samsung is a $160+B company; not in market value, but in sales. Unfortunately Apple isn't the only US client - AT&T, Verizon, HP, Dell are also among Samsung's top clients.
Please show me link stating that Samsung has anything to do with designing Apple's A chips.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
I think it has more to do with Apple's home court advantage, American's nationalism, and racism than innovation. I'll believe Apple is innovating when Apple designs its own A* chips without Samsung's help.
Remember, Samsung is a $160+B company; not in market value, but in sales. Unfortunately Apple isn't the only US client - AT&T, Verizon, HP, Dell are also among Samsung's top clients.
they already design their chips, kid. and they are much better engineered. ofcourse sammy has to manufacture them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
Well, I guess then Apple's injunction request will likewise be denied since the case will certainly be under appeal with Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit?
Or maybe not. Considering Koh's lopsided rulings against Samsung last time around, I predict that Apple's injunction will be granted.
no you are not, you are a troll. end of it. and i have proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
they already design their chips, kid. and they are much better engineered. ofcourse sammy has to manufacture them.
Actually, no. A4 was more or less all based on Samsung's hummingbird design. Apple later acquired Intrinsity, Samsung's partner who helped improve Hummingbird's performance, in 2010 to build its own in-house development team.
dunno anything about A6 since iPhone 5 is not out yet. I think everyone is speculating at this point, but there was an AI article stating that A6 could be Apple's FIRST custom design.