Apple on the offensive against Android; formally requests U.S. injunction against Samsung Galaxy S III

“Late on Tuesday, Apple brought a motion, in its second California litigation against Samsung, ‘to supplement the record regarding Samsung’s Galaxy S III product,'” Florian Mueller reports for FOSS Patents. “Apple formally asks the court for permission to add the S III as another product targeted by Apple’s motion for a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Nexus, a smartphone Samsung co-developed with Google.”

“Apple made this move approximately 20 hours after I wrote about the Galaxy S III being “the obvious next target”. In my blog post I speculated that Apple might bring a preliminary injunction motion against it, possibly after awaiting tomorrow’s preliminary injunction hearing. Apple decided to forge ahead now,” Mueller reports. “Apple is on the offensive against Android. Earlier this week it filed an ITC complaint requesting an immediate import ban of 29 allegedly-infringing HTC devices. There’s an important overlap: the ‘data tapping’ patent that Apple is seeking to enforce against HTC’s current generation of products is one of two patents Apple is using against the S III.”

Mueller reports, “While the preliminary injunction motion filed in February targets the Galaxy Nexus over four patents, Apple is still analyzing the S III’s potential infringement of two of those patents (the new slide-to-unlock patent and the autocomplete patent), but in order to accelerate the process and facilitate the court’s analysis, Apple ‘”will limit its current request for preliminary relief against the Galaxy S III to the ‘604 [unified search, i.e., Siri] and ‘647 [data tapping] patents, because it is clear that infringement can be shown with respect to these patents based on the current record.'”

Read more, including the full text of Apple’s motion, in the full article here.

16 Comments

  1. All engines forward!

    Samsung is a shameless, corrupt corporation. Years ago, before Android was on the horizon, we bought a Samsung dryer. The felt seal that seals the drum started to come apart, and the only way to fix it was to order an entire new stainless steel drum from the factory to the tune of $350.

    We’ll never buy another Samsung product again!

  2. I’ll crap my pants if they actually get an injunction.

    Not going to happen, I’m afraid. Samsung is in the same class as Google – they’re successful and there’s demand for their products so they will continue to get a free pass.

  3. Apple is blazing from both barrels. If they can’t affect any injunctions, it won’t be for lack of trying. As expensive as it is for Apple to pursue this strategy, it’s got to at least give Android OEMs pause when they contemplate their commitment to the Google’s platform.

  4. Considering Florian’s track record at speculation I’ll just assume the Samsung S III will not be blocked.

    Now if he had said there was no way that Samsung could lose then I’d expect a full injunction 😉

    1. That’s not how I would sum up FM’s track record.  I don’t think anyone does a better job of covering Apple’s patent suits than Mueller.

      Click the blog archive links on the right side of the webpage:  http://www.fosspatents.com/

      Not to oversimplify, but Mueller generally believes that Apple’s hardware-based suits based on appearance, etc. do not stand a great chance of success; but Apple’s suits based on iOS patents have greater validity and enjoy a far greater chance of success in the courts.

      He is critical of Google’s policies, and basically says that patent infringement is a way of business for Google.

  5. How can you be a judge presiding over Apple v. Samsung and not feel a little twinge when you see that Samsung hasn’t even flinched in its ways despite all of Apple’s suits? S-Voice? The Chromebox? At some point, you’d think a judge would realize that Samsung feels no qualms about continuing to rip off Apple and doesn’t feel that the U.S. legal system poses them any threat.

    1. Spry Samsung your products are 9 months behind Apple because it takes time to copy.

      That makes Samsung products dated 6 months before they are released. LOL.

    2. Regardless of the merits, Jobs is convinced that MSFT ripped off Apple’s operating system 25 years ago. That was traumatic for him and the company, and he was determined that it never happen again.  So Jobs was more sensitive about this issue than many others might be — unless they had also been ripped of 25 years ago, forced out of the company they founded, and their company left for dead.

      And regardless of the law — I am no expert — Samsung and Android DO copy features of the iPhone & iPad.  It is their opinion, though, that the copying they do is acceptable and the way business is done in the consumer electronics industry.

      So Samdroid copies and Apple sues.  Each is simply doing what comes naturally — what’s in each company’s DNA. It is not about logic, but destiny.  The courts will sort it all out.

        1. Apple LICENSED the appropriate IP from Xerox PARC; they didn’t steal anything. If Xerox “felt” ripped off (and how a corporation is supposed to “feel” anything, I don’t know), I suppose they should have written their license agreement better.

          What part of the word “license” did you not understand?

    3. Mike use that spray to wake up yourself from that diluted dream of yours.

      Apple not scared at all, they are protecting what is by all right what they developed and own.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.