The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also denied Samsung's motion to expedite its appeal against the District Court's orders. "Samsung may of course significantly self-expedite the case by filing its own brief early," the court said, while stating that the Korean company had not shown that the time for Apple to file its brief should be shortened.
Judge Lucy H. Koh of the District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose division on June 26 Samsung and its U.S. subsidiaries from importing or selling within the U.S. the tablet or any "product that is no more than colorably different from this specified product and embodies any design contained in U.S. Design Patent No. D504,889."
The , assigned to Apple, refers to the ornamental design of the device. The Judge said the court had previously found the Galaxy Tab 10.1 to be substantially similar "in the eyes of the ordinary observer" to the D'889.
Apple was ordered to post a bond for US$2.6 million towards any damages sustained by Samsung if it was later found to have been wrongfully enjoined.
Judge Koh subsequently the preliminary injunction on sales of the tablets in the U.S., pending an appeal by Samsung against the order.
Samsung appealed the order before the Federal Circuit and asked it for a stay of the injunction pending appeal. To prevail "a movant must establish a strong likelihood of success on the merits or, failing that, must demonstrate that it has a substantial case on the merits and that the harm factors militate in its favor," the court said.
The company was not immediately available for comment on the order.
A court in the U.K. has taken a different view on the alleged similarities between the iPad and Samsung's Galaxy tablets. The tablets including the Galaxy Tab 10.1 do not infringe on a registered Apple design because "they are not as cool" and the Galaxy Tablets "do not have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design," Judge Colin Birss
The IDG News Service