Apple Once Again Requests for Permanent Injunction Against Samsung

 

Here we go again! Apple has filed a motion in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, asking the court to grant the company another injunction hearing by no later than the end of January next year. If successful, the move would ban a number of Samsung handsets from being able to be sold in the United States.
Sort-of.

This past November, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit basically opened the door for Apple to make its request, finding that Judge Lucy Koh erred in initially denying Apple a permanent injunction against Samsung devices that infringe on three of its patents: Those related to its rubber band, tap to zoom, and pinch to zoom touchscreen features.
"We find no reason to dislodge the district court's conclusion that Apple failed to demonstrate irreparable harm from Samsung's infringement of its design patents. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of injunctive relief with respect to those patents. However, with respect to Apple's utility patents, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion in its analysis and consequently remand for further proceedings," the ruling read.
Here's the kicker though: Apple is seeking its permanent injunction by arguing, in part, that Samsung "will not incur any significant hardship from an injunction because it has stopped selling the particular models found to infringe and claims to have developed design-arounds to Apple's patents," reads Apple's filing.
In other words, Apple is asking the court to forbid Samsung from selling products it doesn't still sell.
If that sounds confusing, it's understandable. However, Apple is also arguing that the injunction is necessary because "Samsung frequently brings new products to market" and that the move would allow Apple to better address new devices should the company feel that they, too, infringe on Apple's existing patents.

"Apple should not have to bear the risk that Samsung's supposed design-arounds are insufficient or that Samsung will not continue its infringement with new products," reads Apple's request.
Additionally, Apple comments that the lack of an injunction would harm Apple – which releases but a few products a year – far more than it would Samsung, which releases around 50 products annually and has more than 100 or so on U.S. shelves at any particular time.
In other words, Apple feels that its meager product lineup (number-wise) is both threatened and damaged by Samsung's infringement, whereas Samsung still has plenty of business left to do should Apple be granted its injunctive relief.

"The fact that Samsung -- a notorious "staller" of Apple's patent infringement lawsuits -- refrained from exhausting all options to delay the process shows that it's not scared to death by the prospect of Apple obtaining an injunction on remand. On a similar note, the fact that Apple did not keep on fighting for an injunction over its design patents also indicates its strategic priorities," writes FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller.