Samsung Enjoined From Selling Galaxy Tab 10.1

On remand, the court granted plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction precluding infringement of its design patent by defendants' Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer. The court previously denied a preliminary injunction in part because defendant raised a substantial question of validity. On appeal, however, the Federal Circuit reversed the court's finding as to invalidity and remanded for consideration of the balance of hardships and public interest factors. On remand, the court found the balance of harms and public interest weighed in favor of an injunction. With respect to the balance of harms, the court explained: "[A]lthough [defendant] will necessarily be harmed by being forced to withdraw its product from the market before the merits can be determined after a full trial, the harm faced by [plaintiff] absent an injunction on the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is greater. [Plaintiff's] interest in enforcing its patent rights is particularly strong because it has presented a strong case on the merits. This Court previously found the Galaxy Tab 10.1 to be substantially similar 'in the eyes of the ordinary observer' to the [design patent-in-suit]. Indeed, the Court noted that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is 'virtually indistinguishable' from [plaintiff's] iPad and iPad 2. . . . [Defendant's] concern over the losses suffered as a result of an injunction cannot overcome [plaintiff's] showing. This is particularly true in light of the fact that (1) there was some evidence that [defendant] altered its design to make its product look more like [plaintiff's], and (2) [plaintiff] will be required to post a bond in the event that this injunction was wrongly issued."

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et. al., 5-11-cv-01846 (CAND June 26, 2012, Order) (Koh, J.).