A U.S. appeals court has overturned the injunction banning sales of the Galaxy Nexus, according to reports. Apple won a preliminary injunction blocking sales of Samsung's Nexus in June, after a California district court ruled that the device infringed upon an Apple-owned search patent. Samsung was later granted a stay against the injunction, allowing sales of the device to continue.

Today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which granted the stay, ruled that the California court "abused its discretion in entering an injunction," according to reports from Reuters. The ruling is significant not only because it allows sales of the Gnex to continue in the long term, but also because it represents a setback for Apple in its on-going patent struggle against Samsung (and by association, Google).

With rumors of a new LG-built Nexus hotting up, and the Galaxy Nexus reaching the end of its shelf life, it's unlikely to make a massive difference to either company's bottom line. Nevertheless, it's an important victory for Android.

Source: Reuters

More: The Galaxy Nexus Ban: This, too, shall pass


Reader comments

Appeals court overturns Galaxy Nexus injunction


Yeah, I like that word, too. lol It makes me feel vindicated, after my Apple fanboy cousin informed me that saying that Koh was an idiot (for all of the bias she showed in favor of Apple before and during the trial) made ME seem like an idiot to him. This feels like very sweet vindication. And, if this is any sign, perhaps a reversal of the one-man-jury's decision, or a re-trial, will be up NEXT.

If memory serves me correctly... didn't Apple have to set aside some money that they would have to pay Samsung, if the devices were ultimately found to NOT infringe? Money to cover any possible loss of revenue because of an unfair injunction. Now that both devices have been freed from the injunction, it seems like Apple should have to fork that money over to Samsung as recompense.

I LOVE my Galaxy Nexus. :-D

Yes it did though unless you read it in the tech blogs you may not have noticed and it hurried or not mentioned in the various change logs. You can back by installing the old apk though up

Ban never should have happened in the first place, considering the whole Android voice search thing existed long before Siri came out. I was LMAO when they announced Siri last year and every body was like "Look, you can talk to your phone now and it will do stuff!" I would just look at them and say "You've seen me do that repeatedly on my phone over the past year."

Even my gf, a few months back, we were in the car and I did a "listen to [whatever band]" and she said "Wait. Android has something like Siri?" All I could do was look at her and say "Yeah. But we had it almost two years before Siri came out." She'll learn, eventually ;)

Incompetent Judge Lucy shouldn't been handling these cases and should be doing traffic court cases as far as I'm concerned. She's all but sleeping with Cook even though she's barking up the wrong tree.

I get the same with the panorama feature. People ask me all the time. If that is the iPhone 5 when they see me do it. I laugh and say hell no it's not Apple. There are better OS that isn't 2 years behind that dated crap you are holding.

People must have very little to be happy about in their lives if they think this is something to celebrate. The ruling was made on litigation unrelated to the patent case decision in August. It was a separate injunction so all of the others associated with the jury trial stand. This case is also now sent back to the California court to be reheard with an 18 page ruling in which the appeals court actually conveys support for parts of Apple's argument but lifts the ban on the ground that they had not demonstrated level of damages or causality. There is probably not much real celebrating at Samsung over this beyond it being a small victory in an ugly mess where they are losing more than they win. BTW, there is also certainly no celebrating at Google today since the appeals court opened the door for direct litigation by Apple against Google over Android features. People really need to read more than a short blurb on Reuters....

Alright, first here is a link to the actual decision. Second, what decision were you reading? Every single one of Apple's arguments was shot down by the Circuit Court. Further, the Circuit Court stated not only did the district court abuse its discretion in stating there was irreparable harm, but the district court's determination of the heuristic algorithms and how they worked was clearly erroneous.

Nothing in this opinion is anything like what you just stated. I read it through and through. I'm well versed at reading opinions as I'm a practicing attorney (federal and state) and I've drafted over seventy opinions for federal district court judges. Your analysis is completely off base, please leave the legal reasoning and analysis to the professionals (ie those of us who have gone to law school and practiced law).

If you would like more information on why you're wrong, I'd be happy to provide it.

Apple iSheep only know how to repeat what Apple tells them. If you think that little kid iPhone is the best smartphone in the clearly lack the brain power to understand things like patent law and court decrees. Waste of time trying to help them understand.

Here is the opinion:

Several things:

1) "Abuse of discretion" is not as bad as it sounds. It merely means that the district court's exercise of discretion was not properly grounded in law and fact. Since injunctions are equitable remedies, they are entrusted to the judge's discretion. Although judges have considerably wide latitude to exercise their discretion, they may not do so using the incorrect legal standard and without sufficient relevant evidence. That's what the Federal Circuit held happened here.

2) All this means is that a preliminary injunction will not be entered (or more accurately, will be vacated). It does not dispose of the underlying infringement allegations.

3) Notwithstanding #2, the claim construction portion of the opinion limits the scope of the asserted claims. Although this portion of the opinion is dicta, in that it is not required to support the holding, it is a strong indication on how the Federal Circuit will view claim construction if and when that issue is appealed. Patent cases are often won or lost based on the claim construction. This part of the opinion is favorable to Samsung.

Judge Posner framed a very strong opinion on this very topic in his decision of the Apple vs Motorola case. Most of Apple's patents involve things that have very little value in the decision of consumer to purchase one phone over another. Certainly, "slide to open" is a perfect example of that....even without considering prior art.