Samsung's device was given a preliminary sales ban in June, with stipulation that it could be reversed if Samsung was cleared of infringing Apple's D'889 tablet design patent. That's just what happened in the jury verdict that was delivered last month, leading Samsung to appeal the decision.
"When the jury found that the Galaxy Tab didn't infringe, it was clear that the injunction would be lifted," said Brian Love, a law professor at Santa Clara University.
Judge Lucy Koh said she didn't have the jurisdiction to make that decision, something that's just been passed down from the higher court.
Both companies are expected back in court on December 6 to discuss a wide range of post-trial issues, including a U.S. sales ban of eight Samsung devices that were found to infringe on Apple's patents.
Samsung has filed a request with the court to have the tablet ban dissolved, based on the order from the higher court.
Samsung's motion to dissolve is fully briefed, and the Court stated last week that, since "the sole basis for the June 26 Preliminary Injunction no longer exists," it would have "dissolve[d] the June 26 Preliminary Injunction if the Court had jurisdiction." The Court now has jurisdiction, and there has been no change in the circumstances since last week that would support any other result. Samsung therefore respectfully requests, pursuant to Rule 62.1(c) and for the reasons set forth in Samsung's prior papers, that the Court dissolve the preliminary injunction forthwith.
Apple has filed an opposition to Samsung's above request:
Given that [judgment as a matter of law] (JMOL) and permanent injunction motions have already been filed and that oppositions are due in just three weeks, Apple believes that the more logical course is for the Court to decide all issues of injunctive relief (including Samsung's motion to dissolve and Apple's motion for a permanent injunction) at the same time that it decides the related JMOL motions. Samsung cannot show any urgent need to decide its motion first, given that Samsung has admitted that the injunction will not cause significant harm because Samsung is already selling a successor product and the Tab 10.1 is nearing the end of its product life.