Apple Turns to ITC for Samsung Import Block

| News

Apple filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission on Tuesday in an effort to block the import of Samsung smartphones and tablets. The filing follows a similar request for a preliminary injunction Apple submitted in its patent infringement case against Samsung.

Apple and Samsung have been locked in a legal battle over patent infringement claims for several months. Both companies have alleged that the other’s mobile devices use patented technologies without proper licensing. Both have filed lawsuits in the U.S. and other countries.

Apple files ITC complaint against SamsungApple asks ITC to block Galaxy smartphone at tablet imports

By filing an ITC complaint, Apple has a backup plan of attack to block Samsung should the courts deny its preliminary injunction request. Should the ITC decide to investigate Apple’s complaint, however, there won’t be a quick decision since the complaint could take as long as 18 months to be heard.

Samsung responded to Apple’s latest filing by saying the company “attempts to create an emergency where none exists,” according to Bloomberg.

Samsung representatives added that should the ITC ban the import of come of its smartphone and tablet products, it ““will not affect by one minute Samsung’s ability to continue selling competing products.”

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

Comments

Nemo

Whoever is doing the press releases for Samsung had better learn to be more circumspect in what is said on Samsung’s behalf.  Depending on what patent claims Apple is asserting, Samsung’s statement that the ITC banning import of certain of its smartphones and tablets won’t affect its ability to sell competing products could later be cited to estop Samsung from asserting that the patents that Apple’s has asserted in the civil case are essential to its ability to sell competing smart devices.

And then there is Apple’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Motion).  Among the the things that Apple must show is that the balance of the harms is in its favor, that is, it will be harmed more by the court’s denial of the Motion than Samsung will be harmed by the court granting the Motion.  Well, Samsung’s big-mouthed mouth piece just informed the court that Samsung’s ability to compete won’t be harmed by a ban on sales in the U.S. of its latest and most successful Android devices; thus, Samsung won’t be much hurt by the court granting Apple’s Motion.  So, if Apple shows that it is likely to prevail on the merits, Judge Koh can rely on Samsung’s own statement that neither competition or Samsung’s ability to compete will be restrained by her granting Apple’s Motion; thus, the balance of the harms of not granting the Motion would be in Apple’s favor and no public interests in competition will be prejudiced by granting the Motion.  I’d be surprised if Mr. Jacobs, Esq. didn’t notify the court of Samsung’s bold boast in support of Apple’s arguments in its Motion so that Judge Koh can take it into consideration as she decides whether to grant Apple’s Motion.

Finally, Samsung sounds a lot like a kid who knows it is about to lose, a statement that is a kind of: go ahead and take it, I don’t care.  This is very poor operation from Samsung’s General Counsel.  All public statements regarding matters being litigated should be cleared by the General Counsel, after he has edited them, with the assistance of outside counsel who is litigating, to be certain that nothing is published which will prejudice Samsung’s position in any of its legal proceedings.  That hopefully didn’t happen here, for if it did, it would indicate an even more profound problem with the General Counsel’s Office.

Log-in to comment