Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Samsung Gets Second Chance With Galaxy Tab Injunction

By - Source: Engadget | B 16 comments

In August, tensions between the two tech giants Apple and Samsung finally culminated into one massive battle in the courtroom. In the end, Samsung took a heavy blow to the tune of $1 billion dollars and a preliminary injunction put on Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 sales.

But thanks to the United States appeals system, Samsung was able to get the ban reconsidered on basis that the jury found no patent infringement on the Galaxy Tab 10.1.

A U.S. appeals court ruled on Friday that Judge Koh should reconsider the issue, just one month before Samsung's release of its second generation Note.

Although the Galaxy Tab 10.1 may be an older model, a sales ban could prove damaging in the holiday shopping season.

Since the end of the landmark courtroom battle in August, Apple and Samsung have been going back and fourth with appeals and motions in order to work out more favorable trial rulings. Last week, Apple asked for another $707 million in damages from Samsung on top of the $1.05 billion already awarded by the jury.

Samsung, on the other hand, asked for a re-trial due to the time constraints Judge Koh ordered in the previous litigation. Additionally, despite the hundreds of pages of instructions, Samsung argues that the jury committed misconduct during its verdict deliberations.

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 16 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 24 Hide
    ohim , October 2, 2012 5:16 PM
    Seriously , each time i see an apple suing someone i want to punch an apple product buyer in the face just for supporting this scumbag of a company.
  • 22 Hide
    aracheb , October 2, 2012 4:13 PM
    no patent infringement, then what was the freaking verdict for the 1 billion based on?
    Can't understand this.

    how can they be guilty in a patent lawsuit when there where no patent infringed?

    Bought judge and biased jury?
  • 21 Hide
    freggo , October 2, 2012 4:24 PM
    arachebno patent infringement, then what was the freaking verdict for the 1 billion based on?Can't understand this.how can they be guilty in a patent lawsuit when there where no patent infringed?Bought judge and biased jury?


    On the Phones... iPhone vs Samsung's line of smart phones.
    Apple prefers to sue rather than try to win by having a better product at a competitive price.

Other Comments
  • 8 Hide
    mikenygmail , October 2, 2012 4:10 PM
    Samsung should buy AMD.
  • 22 Hide
    aracheb , October 2, 2012 4:13 PM
    no patent infringement, then what was the freaking verdict for the 1 billion based on?
    Can't understand this.

    how can they be guilty in a patent lawsuit when there where no patent infringed?

    Bought judge and biased jury?
  • -8 Hide
    hate machine , October 2, 2012 4:14 PM
    Samsung should buy Microsoft.
  • 19 Hide
    jivdis1x , October 2, 2012 4:23 PM
    Ask for another $707 million??!!!!! WTH.

    Apple: " Hey judge, samsung lost the case, why don't we throw in another 707 million for good measure?"
  • 21 Hide
    freggo , October 2, 2012 4:24 PM
    arachebno patent infringement, then what was the freaking verdict for the 1 billion based on?Can't understand this.how can they be guilty in a patent lawsuit when there where no patent infringed?Bought judge and biased jury?


    On the Phones... iPhone vs Samsung's line of smart phones.
    Apple prefers to sue rather than try to win by having a better product at a competitive price.

  • -8 Hide
    TechnoD , October 2, 2012 4:30 PM
    I think they should put all trials and court cases on the matter on hold and let the CIA conduct an investigation into all of this for fraud.
  • 17 Hide
    Pinhedd , October 2, 2012 5:02 PM
    technoDI think they should put all trials and court cases on the matter on hold and let the CIA conduct an investigation into all of this for fraud.


    The CIA is an intelligence agency. They do not investigate fraud and they do not operate domestically. You are thinking of the FBI
  • 20 Hide
    rantoc , October 2, 2012 5:08 PM
    jivdis1xAsk for another $707 million??!!!!! WTH. Apple: " Hey judge, samsung lost the case, why don't we throw in another 707 million for good measure?"


    They needed the 607 mil to fix the failed replacement for Google maps and 100 mil to the jury for making sure it was a "fair trial".
  • 24 Hide
    ohim , October 2, 2012 5:16 PM
    Seriously , each time i see an apple suing someone i want to punch an apple product buyer in the face just for supporting this scumbag of a company.
  • -6 Hide
    Gundam288 , October 2, 2012 5:58 PM
    pinheddThe CIA is an intelligence agency. They do not investigate fraud and they do not operate domestically. You are thinking of the FBI


    And doesn't the FBI have a form of SWAT and also operate domestically and internationaly as well?

    on a completely random side note, what in the world does the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) need over 320,000 rounds of ammo for? o_O


    back on topic tho. I'm kinda glad they can sell the 10.1, but didn't the 10.2 come out recently? or is the 10.1 better in terms of functions?
  • 10 Hide
    sliem , October 2, 2012 6:25 PM
    Could have used that money to end world hunger... for a year.
  • 1 Hide
    back_by_demand , October 2, 2012 8:12 PM
    pinheddThe CIA is an intelligence agency. They do not investigate fraud and they do not operate domestically. You are thinking of the FBI

    The FBI investigate criminal matters, this is a civil case, only fines can be imposed and not custodial sentences.
  • 2 Hide
    ko888 , October 2, 2012 8:47 PM
    gundam288... on a completely random side note, what in the world does the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) need over 320,000 rounds of ammo for? ...
    When there's an outbreak of a serious disease in livestock they have to be able to kill the diseased livestock "humanely". That's my guess.
  • 0 Hide
    luciferano , October 2, 2012 9:17 PM
    back_by_demandThe FBI investigate criminal matters, this is a civil case, only fines can be imposed and not custodial sentences.


    The post that you replied to was replying to a post that said to question if there are criminal activities such as fraud going on. IDK if that would fall under FBI jurisdiction, but I don't think that it would just be a civil case if there is fraud involved.
  • 0 Hide
    Pinhedd , October 3, 2012 12:45 AM
    back_by_demandThe FBI investigate criminal matters, this is a civil case, only fines can be imposed and not custodial sentences.


    Fraud is a criminal offence
  • 1 Hide
    guardianangel42 , October 4, 2012 3:23 AM
    jivdis1xAsk for another $707 million??!!!!! WTH. Apple: " Hey judge, samsung lost the case, why don't we throw in another 707 million for good measure?"


    Rule #2: Double Tap.