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 2026

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

Cookies Settings

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

Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
Gift this article