Apple seeks US preliminary injunction against Samsung’s Galaxy S III
Apple put forward a second California litigation against South Korea-based Samsung earlier this week when it sought the court’s consent to add the Android-powered Galaxy S III smartphone to its motion for a preliminary injunction against the Galaxy Nexus.
According to FOSS Patents:
Apple made this move approximately 20 hours after I wrote about the Galaxy S III being “the obvious next target”. In my blog post I speculated that Apple might bring a preliminary injunction motion against it, possibly after awaiting tomorrow’s preliminary injunction hearing. Apple decided to forge ahead now. Apple is on the offensive against Android. Earlier this week it filed an ITC complaint requesting an immediate import ban of 29 allegedly-infringing HTC devices. There’s an important overlap: the “data tapping” patent that Apple is seeking to enforce against HTC’s current generation of products is one of two patents Apple is using against the S III.
Apple purchased the S III in the United Kingdom, where Samsung launched it on May 29. The U.S. launch date is June 21 — precisely two weeks after the preliminary injunction hearing.
Apple’s motion notes that “[a]ccording to press reports, Samsung has already sold over nine million preorders of the Galaxy S III; indeed, the Galaxy S III has been reported to be the most extensively preordered piece of consumer electronics in history.”
Apple filed the first preliminary injunction motion against the Galaxy Nexus in February over four disputed patents. The Cupertino, Calif.-based Company’s requested in its latest motion that Samsung withhold the launch of the device’s successor in the United States until the court rules on the preliminary injunction request.
Samsung replied to the motion this afternoon, contending Apple cannot continue to add to its record for the Galaxy Nexus:
“If Apple wishes to seek an injunction against the Galaxy S III, the Court should require Apple to file a new motion and allow the parties to develop a full factual record on all four factors. Accordingly, the Court should reject Apple’s motion to amend its current notice of motion for a preliminary injunction.”
This article is cross-posted at 9to5Google.