ITC bans sale of Samsung products that infringe Apple patents
On Friday, the ITC made Apple Inc. very happy when it issued a ban on some Samsung Electronics Co. products that it found infringed on two Apple patents.
August 12, 2013 at 06:17 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
On Friday, the International Trade Commission (ITC) made Apple Inc. very happy when it issued a ban on some Samsung Electronics Co. products that it found infringed on two Apple patents—one having to do with finger swiping, and the other with headphone jacks.
The ITC didn't specify exactly which products the ban covers, but Samsung was quick to reply.
“We have already taken measures to ensure that all of our products will continue to be available in the United States,” a spokesman told the Wall Street Journal. The company has apparently made changes to its design to remove the infringing features from its devices.
The Obama administration has 60 days to decide if the ban will actually take effect, but there are some snags in the situation. The administration recently vetoed an ITC ruling in favor of Samsung that would have banned the sale of some Apple products in the U.S. Choosing to let this ban stand could give the impression of favoring domestic companies like Apple over the South Korea-based Samsung.
Read more about Apple and Samsung's ongoing patent fight on InsideCounsel:
Apple can't add Samsung's Galaxy S4 smartphone to infringement suit
Japanese court finds Samsung did not infringe on Apple synchronization patent
Apple wins UK essential patent claim against Samsung
Technology: Are you an Apple or a Samsung fan?
Apple drops patent claims against Samsung smartphone only sold in Europe
On Friday, the International Trade Commission (ITC) made
The ITC didn't specify exactly which products the ban covers, but Samsung was quick to reply.
“We have already taken measures to ensure that all of our products will continue to be available in the United States,” a spokesman told the Wall Street Journal. The company has apparently made changes to its design to remove the infringing features from its devices.
The Obama administration has 60 days to decide if the ban will actually take effect, but there are some snags in the situation. The administration recently vetoed an ITC ruling in favor of Samsung that would have banned the sale of some Apple products in the U.S. Choosing to let this ban stand could give the impression of favoring domestic companies like
Read more about
Japanese court finds Samsung did not infringe on
Technology: Are you an Apple or a Samsung fan?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Amex Latest Target as Regulators Scrutinize Whether Credit Card Issuers Deliver on Rewards Promises
Wells Fargo and Bank of America Agree to Pay Combined $60 Million to Settle SEC Probe
‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
