US appeals court resurrects Apple’s bid for Samsung ban

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

US appeals court resurrects Apple’s bid for Samsung ban

The Federal Circuit has revived Apple’s plea to ban US sales of Samsung tablets and smartphones found by a jury last year to be infringing Apple’s patents

Yesterday, the appeals court ordered a California judge to reconsider a December 2012 decision to refuse to ban some Samsung products that had been found to infringe on three Apple design and utility patents covering mobile devices.

Ruling on Apple v Samsung Electronics, the Federal Circuit said that the lower court should not have required Apple to prove that the infringing features were the only reason customers bought Samsung’s products.

The Federal Circuit did not rule on Apple’s request for a permanent injunction in relation to the utility patents for a “bounce back” feature. It also upheld the district court’s decision to refuse an injunction in relation to Apple’s design patents.

Apple was awarded more than $1 billion last year after a jury found that Samsung infringed the patents. But the award was reduced in March, when District Judge Lucy Koh found that the jury had erred in its calculations relating to around $450 million.

Koh awarded a retrial for that portion of the damages, for which closing arguments are expected to take place in San Jose today. The jury will rule on Apple’s claim for hundreds of millions of dollars more from Samsung over 13 Samsung products.

The case is the latest installment in a long-running battle between the two technology companies. In June, the ITC banned the import and sale of Apple products that it found infringed Samsung’s patent rights. But the decision, which related to AT&T models of the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, iPad 3G and iPad 2 3G, was vetoed a few days later by the Obama administration on the basis that it was not in the public interest.

Apple and Samsung will take part in another trial over newer Samsung products in April 2014.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Howard Hogan, IP partner at Gibson Dunn, says AI deepfakes are driving lawyers to rethink how IP protects creativity and innovation
Vivien Chan joins us for our ‘Women in IP’ series to discuss gender bias in the legal profession and why the business model followed by law firms leaves little room for women leaders
Partner Jeremy Hertzog explains how his team worked through a huge amount of disclosure from Adidas and what victory means for the firm
Evarist Kameja and Hadija Juma at Bowmans explain why a new law in Tanzania marks a significant shift in IP enforcement
In the wake of controversy surrounding Banksy’s recent London mural, AJ Park’s Thomas Huthwaite and Eloise Calder delve into the challenges street artists face in protecting their works and rights
Alex Levkin, founder of IPNote, discusses reshaping the filing industry through legal tech, and why practitioners’ advice should stretch beyond immediate legal needs
Cohausz & Florack, together with Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben, has taken action against Amazon on behalf of three VIA LA licensors
In the fourth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss unconscious bias in the IP workplace and how to address it
Greg Munt, who has moved from Griffith Hack to James & Wells after four decades, hails his new firm’s approach to client service
Practitioners warn that closing the Denver regional office could trigger a domino effect, threatening local innovation and access to IP resources
Gift this article