Samsung suffered a minor setback of sorts when the appeal at the U.S. Appeals Court for a stay on the injunction imposed by the US district Judge Lucy H. Koh on the import and sale of the 10” Samsung tablets in the US market.
The original sanction on imports of the tablet was imposed as it was complained by Apple that the tablet was strikingly similar to its iPad. In her judgment on June 26, Judge Koh mentioned that Samsung should refrain from selling their tablet or any other “product that is no more than colorably different from this specified product and embodies any design contained in U.S. Design Patent No. D504,889”. This patent refers to the design of the iPad, which is unique and which the Samsung tablet is strikingly similar to.
In the eyes of an ordinary customer, the designs may appear completely the same. Prior to sales ban imposed, Apple had been asked to post a $2.6 million bond in case the trial went in favor of Samsung. Judge Koh even refused to lift the imposed ban pending an appeal. Resulting Samsung moved to the Federal Circuit for an appeal against the imposition of the ban, which has now been rejected. The court has mentioned in the ruling, “a movant must establish a strong likelihood of success on the merits or, failing that, must demonstrate that it has a substantial case on the merits and that the harm factors militate in its favor.”
On a different note, a similar patent law infringement case between Samsung and Apple for the Samsung 10” tablet in the UK, the court in London had rejected the call for imposition of ban stating “they are not as cool” and that they “do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design”. This was mentioned by Judge Colin Birss in his judgment.