Samsung wins ITC ban on Apple products

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

Samsung wins ITC ban on Apple products

The ITC has banned imports and sales of several older iPhone and iPad models sold by AT&T after finding Apple infringed a patent owned by Samsung

On Tuesday, the ITC issued a limited order preventing sales and imports of AT&T models of the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G. Samsung had also accused Apple of violating another three patents, but the ITC ruled that the Silicon Valley company did not infringe those.

The ITC ruled that Apple had infringed a standard essential patent covering 3G wireless technology.

The ruling reversed a September decision by ITC Judge James Gildea, who found that Apple did not infringe the patents. The case, 337-794, was filed in August 2011.

The case is the latest instalment in a long-running battle between the two companies over smartphone technology.

"We are disappointed that the commission has overturned an earlier ruling and we plan to appeal. Today’s decision has no impact on the availability of Apple products in the United States," Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet said in a statement.

Samsung issued a statement which said the ITC decision “confirmed Apple’s history of free-riding on Samsung’s technological innovations”.

“Our decades of research and development in mobile technologies will continue and we will continue to offer innovative products to consumers in the United States,” it read.

Apple has filed a separate ITC complaint, accusing Samsung of infringing two patents relating to its iPhone and iPad devices. An ITC judge ruled that Samsung infringed one patent but not the other. A final ruling on that case is expected in August.

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