Apple loses bid for injunction against Samsung

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Apple loses bid for injunction against Samsung

A motion by Apple for a permanent injunction against Samsung has been rejected by a US district court judge

The lawsuit, which alleged Samsung had infringed on three Apple patents, represents another blow to Apple in its efforts to patent aspects of smartphone technology that are becoming increasingly universal.

“Weighing all of the factors,” wrote Judge Lucy Koh in her opinion, “the Court concludes that the principles of equity do not support a permanent injunction here.”

Apple was required to prove that it had suffered “irreparable harm” due to Samsung’s infringements. Judge Koh, however, was unconvinced.

“Apple has not demonstrated that it will suffer irreparable harm to its reputation or goodwill as an innovator without an injunction,” Judge Koh wrote. “Samsung argues persuasively that Apple’s reputation has proved extremely robust, [thus] weakening Apple’s claim that it has suffered or will suffer irreparable harm to its reputation from infringement of only three patents.”

According to the blog Foss Patents, the decision has significant implications regarding how likely Apple will be to agree to a settlement in the near future.

“Three weeks ago, Apple and Samsung agreed to withdraw all litigation pending between them outside the United States,” said Florian Mueller in a blog post. “Apple’s continued inability to convince US courts that its patents entitle it to drastic remedies has probably increased the likelihood of a near-term settlement of the remaining litigation between them (though it could still continue for some time if the parties can’t agree on a payment covering past infringement).”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Susan Keston and Rachel Fetches at HGF explain why the CoA’s decision to grant the UPC’s first permanent injunction demonstrates the court’s readiness to diverge from national court judgments
IP, M&A, life sciences and competition partners advised on deal that brings together brands such as ‘Huggies’ and ‘Kleenex’ with ‘Band-Aid’ and ‘Tylenol’
Stability AI, represented by Bird & Bird, is not liable for secondary copyright infringement, though Fieldfisher client Getty succeeds in some trademark claims
Gift this article