Apple’s wins blow against Samsung in patent wars, which could led to
a sales ban of Korean firm’s smartphones. Photograph: Marcus Brandt/dpa/Corbis
Posted on 09/18/2015 4:41:37 PM PDT by Swordmaker
Court of appeals states lower court abused its right of discretion in blocking Apple from stopping Samsung sales of smartphones in the US
Apple should have been awarded an injunction against Samsung in their long-running smartphone patent war, the US court of appeals ruled on Thursday.
The court of appeals for the federal circuit in Washington DC said the lower court, led by US district judge Lucy Koh, abused its discretion by denying Apple an injunction against Samsung after a jury ordered the Korean company to pay $120m in May last year for infringing three of Apple’s patents.
Slide to unlock
The case involved patents covering slide-to-unlock, autocorrect and data detection features.
The appeals court ruling said that Apple’s proposed injunction is narrow because it does not want to ban Samsung’s devices from the marketplace, and that Samsung can remove the patented features without recalling its products.
The case was sent back to a federal district court in San Jose, California, to reconsider the injunction.
Little impact
Calling Apple’s injunction request “unfounded”, a spokeswoman said Samsung will ask the full slate of federal circuit judges to review the latest decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
I took Intellectual Property in law school and quickly concluded it wasn’t for me.
Let's see. Samsung has lost at the 9th Circuit Court, then they couldn't get the full en banc review there, which is a loss, so they appealed under a different theory to the US Court of Appeals in Washington DC and have now lost there. They've lost at every turn in their appeal process. I suspect the en banc at the US Court of appeals in Washington will turn them down. There is no reason for the US Supreme Court to revisit this.
Unlike the Apple anti-Trust e-book case where the lower courts totally ignored the Supreme Courts specific guidelines on how to apply the anti-trust price fixing laws, there is no compelling reason for the Court to take this case up. In THAT case, there certainly is, because some trial judges and appellate justices need to be spanked all over again for ignoring CASE LAW that is res judicata, especially one in which the Supremes explicitly set out guidelines in writing with specific examples which the Apple case fit perfectly.
Love your Freepname. . .
Thanks. You’re right. It’s just that this case is one that seems to attract jurists’ needless fingerprints. I hope it doesn’t, going forward, but won’t be surprised if it does.
Keep em coming Swordmaker…
It's nice to be recognized instead of incessantly attacked, Tubebender. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.