Apple fails to get US injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1

Having previously failed in a California district court to have Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 banned for alleged patent infringement, Apple applied to the US Court of Appeals in Washington to overturn the decision and thus obtain a permanent ban of the iPad competitor. The appeals court found that a single element of Apple’s case, that of patent “D889”, might warrant reconsideration and directed Judge Lucy Koh to do so.

Having gained that partial judgement, Apple then asked the California district court to impose an immediate preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Tab 10.1 while the appeals process was in train. However, the court was unsympathetic to Cupertino’s iDevice maker, the judge ruling that there was no jurisdiction to grant one and effectively blocking Apple’s attempt to prevent Samsung’s tablet from being sold in the US.

Following the appeals court decision, Samsung itself appealed against that ruling, resulting in the California action being paused until the newer appellate decision has been made. Meantime, Samsung can continue to market its flagship tablet in the US, at least until the results of the California case are finalized.

While Judge Koh is duty bound to reconsider the matter of the patent identified by the Court of Appeal, there is no direction from the appeal judges that her original finding of non-infringement is invalid, and she is entitled to again find in Samsung’s favour, something that is likely to happen.

In its plea for injunctive relief, Apple’s legal eagles claimed that "Each day that Samsung continues to sell its [allegedly infringing] Tab 10.1 causes additional harm to Apple through design dilution, lost sales, lost market share, and lost future sales of tag-along products.”
 
If the actions described in the “plea” sound remarkably like the very definition of free market competition to you, then you’re not hallucinating.

Apple concluded with “This court should enter a preliminary injunction forthwith to protect Apple from additional irreparable harm”. In effect, Apple has demanded that the court legislate its competition away, a remarkable request for the spectacularly profitable US corporate to make but recently all too familiar a stance from Apple.

Source: The Register