Apple loses bid for injunction against Samsung

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Apple loses bid for injunction against Samsung

A motion by Apple for a permanent injunction against Samsung has been rejected by a US district court judge

The lawsuit, which alleged Samsung had infringed on three Apple patents, represents another blow to Apple in its efforts to patent aspects of smartphone technology that are becoming increasingly universal.

“Weighing all of the factors,” wrote Judge Lucy Koh in her opinion, “the Court concludes that the principles of equity do not support a permanent injunction here.”

Apple was required to prove that it had suffered “irreparable harm” due to Samsung’s infringements. Judge Koh, however, was unconvinced.

“Apple has not demonstrated that it will suffer irreparable harm to its reputation or goodwill as an innovator without an injunction,” Judge Koh wrote. “Samsung argues persuasively that Apple’s reputation has proved extremely robust, [thus] weakening Apple’s claim that it has suffered or will suffer irreparable harm to its reputation from infringement of only three patents.”

According to the blog Foss Patents, the decision has significant implications regarding how likely Apple will be to agree to a settlement in the near future.

“Three weeks ago, Apple and Samsung agreed to withdraw all litigation pending between them outside the United States,” said Florian Mueller in a blog post. “Apple’s continued inability to convince US courts that its patents entitle it to drastic remedies has probably increased the likelihood of a near-term settlement of the remaining litigation between them (though it could still continue for some time if the parties can’t agree on a payment covering past infringement).”

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Sources at four firms explain how changes to USPTO fees provide opportunities to give clients strategic counselling
An intervention by Dyson into the UK’s patent box regime and a report unveiling the major SEP owners were among the big talking points this week
With the threshold for proving copyright infringement by AI tools clearer than ever, 2025 could answer some of the key questions
Partners at Latham & Watkins and Finnegan reveal how they helped explain their client’s technology to a jury
One of Managing IP’s most influential people in IP for 2024, Hurtado Rivas discusses mental health in the profession, the changing role of a trademark lawyer, and what keeps a Nestlé IP counsel busy
Transactions specialist Mathilda Davidson, who has joined from Gowling WLG, says the firm will help clients seeking venture capital investment
Sources in the US, UK, and Australia hope that pressing questions surrounding AI and patent eligibility will finally be answered this year
Two partners who joined Brown Rudnick last year explain how their new firm’s venture capital experience is helping them accomplish their goals
Michael Gaertner explains why Locke Lord’s merger with Troutman Pepper sparked the need to seek a new home and why Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney ticked the right boxes
The appointment makes good on the firm’s promise to boost its UPC expertise
Gift this article