Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

Apple's bid to block June 21 US launch of Samsung Galaxy S III denied

Apple will not be able to bar sales of Samsung's Galaxy S III smartphone before its June 21 launch in the U.S., a judge has ruled.

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, Calif., ruled this week that Apple's push to block sales of the Galaxy S III in just over a week wouldn't fit on her calendar, according to Reuters. Apple had hoped to win a quick ruling that would push back the launch of Samsung's new flagship Android-based phone.

Koh's ruling came only a few days after Apple suffered another setback in court, when U.S. Circuit Court Judge Richard Posner in Chicago, Ill., deemed that Apple hat not shown enough to prove injury. The case was scheduled to begin this week, but Posner's ruling canceled the trial.

In contrast, Apple's setback against Samsung in attempting to block the launch of the Galaxy S III is not an indication that Apple would lose an eventual court ruling. Instead, the scheduling of the court just wouldn't allow a ruling to be made in the next week.

Apple indicated last week in front of Koh that they were interested in pursuing a restraining order against the Galaxy S III in order to block sales of the device before it reaches U.S. shores. Apple attorney Josh Krevitt told the court that the harm would be "irreparable" once sales of the Android smartphone began.

Samsung reportedly saw more than 9 million preorders of the Galaxy S III with its carrier partners before launch. It already debuted in late May in Europe and is now available in a total of 28 countries, and Samsung expects to have the Galaxy S III available in 145 countries on 296 wireless operators by the end of July.

Samsung first unveiled the quad-core Galaxy S III a month ago. It features a 4.8-inch HD Super AMOLED screen, a 1.4-gigahertz processor, one gigabyte of RAM, and available capacities of 16, 32 and 64 gigabytes.

Apple has argued in court that the Galaxy S III should be included as part of another ongoing preliminary injunction case against the Galaxy Nexus, since Apple sees Samsung's latest smartphone as a successor to the handset created through a partnership of Google and Samsung. In response, Samsung said in a formal opposition that Apple's motion "should not be done on two days' notice, without due process, and with no factual record whatsoever."

Samsung and Apple are engaged in a number of patent infringement suits against one another. They began more than a year ago, when Apple sued Samsung and accused the company of copying the look and feel of the iPhone and iPad, and the cases now span over 10 countries around the world.



91 Comments

markbyrn 15 Years · 662 comments

It's no wonder that Mr Cook hates using litigation - Apple ends up wasting nuclear amounts of money on legal stalemates.  

jerryswitched26 13 Years · 565 comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by markbyrn 

It's no wonder that Mr Cook hates using litigation - Apple ends up wasting nuclear amounts of money on legal stalemates.  

 

 

I don't remember a single decisive win for Apple.  

 

They should  replace their General Counsel.

 

 

Bruce Sewell to Join Apple as General Counsel & SVP

Daniel Cooperman to Retire

CUPERTINO, California—September 15, 2009—Apple® today announced that Bruce Sewell, formerly senior vice president and general counsel of Intel Corporation, will join Apple as the company’s General Counsel and senior vice president, Legal and Government Affairs, reporting to Apple CEO Steve Jobs. Daniel Cooperman, who has served in these roles at Apple for the past two years, will be retiring at the end of September.

“We are thrilled to have Bruce join our executive team, and wish Dan a very happy retirement,” said Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “With Bruce’s extensive experience in litigation, securities and intellectual property, we expect this to be a seamless transition.”

At Intel, Sewell has been responsible for leading all of Intel’s legal, corporate affairs and corporate social responsibility programs, managing attorneys and policy professionals located in over 30 countries around the world. He joined Intel in 1995 as a senior attorney assigned to counsel various business groups in areas such as antitrust compliance, licensing and intellectual property. In 2001, Sewell was promoted to vice president and deputy general counsel, managing Intel’s litigation portfolio, and handled corporate transactions including M&A activities.

Prior to joining Intel, he was a partner in the litigation firm of Brown and Bain PC. Sewell was admitted to the California Bar in 1986 and to the Washington D.C. Bar in 1987. He received his J.D. from George Washington University in 1986, and a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Lancaster, in the United Kingdom, in 1979.

Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Today, Apple continues to lead the industry in innovation with its award-winning computers, OS X operating system and iLife and professional applications. Apple is also spearheading the digital media revolution with its iPod portable music and video players and iTunes online store, and has entered the mobile phone market with its revolutionary iPhone.

quadra 610 17 Years · 6687 comments

It's not winning that matters. It's about Apple making their presence known and sending a message. 

 

This has a substantial effect on the industry, as well as their competitors' roadmaps.

battlescarred1 15 Years · 74 comments

I was thinking the same thing. Seems to me that having a patent offers very little protection, regardless if you take an infringer to court or not. The infringer may get slapped, but keeps on selling. Apple can't protect their IP any better than anyone else. What's the point of continuing to throw more money at the problem when trying to protect yourself costs so much, with little to nothing to show for it?

battlescarred1 15 Years · 74 comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 

It's not winning that matters. It's about Apple making their presence known and sending a message. 

 

This has a substantial effect on the industry, as well as their competitors' roadmaps.

What effect? Everyone keeps selling the same type (design) of smartphone regardless of court battles. Don't see anyone having much trouble getting their products to market no matter how closely one mirrors the other.