ITC failed says Apple, arguing for veto of injunction against Apple iPhone 4 and Apple iPad 2

ITC failed says Apple, arguing for veto of injunction against Apple iPhone 4 and Apple iPad 2
Apple and Samsung have both filed with the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the body of government that can veto ITC decisions. Apple is seeking to have a decision made by the ITC earlier this month vetoed. That decision places a limited injunction on the Apple iPhone 4 and the Apple iPad 2. What makes the ITC decision so unusual is that it is based on a standards-essential patent that Samsung claims Apple had infringed on. But the ITC had previously decided not to issue injunctions based on SEP patents. Samsung's declaration that its patent was standards-essential should have forced the Korean manufacturer to license it under FRAND terms.

Based on Apple's submission to the United States Trade Representative, which is part of the executive branch of the U.S. government, the USTR is going to review the ITC action. The latter has already informed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to hold all shipments of the devices involved in the order. Following the transmitting of the order to Customs, there is a 60 day period for review by the President, who can veto it or let it take effect. If Apple is not happy with the result of the Presidential review, it can take the case to Federal Court.

Apple, of course, wants the ITC's order to be blocked. Samsung believes that there are better opportunities for the ITC to determine policy on SEPs. This is the real thing folks, and not a drill. While banning the Apple iPad 2 might not be a big deal for Apple, the Apple iPhone 4 has been selling as well as could be considering its age. Offered by carriers for free as a way to lock in accounts for two years, banning that device might cause more than just a small headache for Apple, especially considering that these are finished units that would be held up at Customs.

source: Scribd, FOSSPatents via AppleInsider

Related phones

iPad 2
  • Display 9.7" 1024 x 768 pixels
  • Camera 0.7 MP / 0.3 MP VGA front
  • Processor Apple A5, Dual-core, 1000 MHz
  • Storage 64 GB
  • Battery 6944 mAh
iPhone 4
  • Display 3.5" 640 x 960 pixels
  • Camera 5 MP / 0.3 MP VGA front
  • Processor Apple A4, Single core, 1000 MHz
  • Storage 32 GB
  • Battery 1420 mAh(7.00h 3G talk time)



1. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

Quit crying over the injunction you BIG BABY. u already pay ITC and every judge in the courts too BAN THE GALAXY NEXUS which was everyones favorite phone. NOW PREPARE too get a taste of youre own medicine. and stop KISSING THE ITC A$$ with your fat wallets/mac's

5. jdoee100

Posts: 334; Member since: Jun 04, 2013

Apple's invisibility is starting to crack. Too bad, they were once a really great company. It needs a new leader, but leaders like jobs don't grow on trees.

9. james004

Posts: 486; Member since: May 15, 2013

America will never rule against its own company. After all American Government gets tax from Apple's income.

10. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

They get tax from all income including Samsung.

12. RomeoJDR

Posts: 245; Member since: Dec 09, 2011

Apple has been all over the news because of the loopholes they take advantage of to pay far less of an income tax percentage than you or I and are currently being investigated for tax evasion. It is not the tax revenue that protects Apple, it is the "campaign contributions" (aka bribes) that usually protects them from persecution. Problem for Apple is Samsung has the capital and surely used it to invest in "campaign contributions" as well. Apple is no more of an American company than any other when 90% of their workforce is overseas.

13. Googler

Posts: 813; Member since: Jun 10, 2013

Especially considering Obama had Tim come to one of his State of the Union addresses and publicly gave Apple credit for moving some manufacturing back to the US. Ban is never going to happen, regardless how much it's warranted.

2. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

oh joy! Apple could give iPhone 4s and later iPhone 5 for free on contract. Don't be stingy Apple.

4. dsDoan

Posts: 235; Member since: Dec 28, 2011

You're mixing up roles of manufacturers (Apple, in this case) and carriers.

7. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Apple is the supplier of iPhone so if iPhone 4 is not available then they need to provide alternative. iPhone 4s is just software improvement and I sure obsolete parts don't cost much either. To say it's going to give Apple headaches is laughable.

3. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

Lol live by the sword die by the sword Apple. If you want to avoid this stuff, don't baselessly start it.

6. ihatesmartphone unregistered

This thing annoying ME!!

8. darkkjedii

Posts: 31001; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Apple iOS 7 shows you've returned to the lab. Now stay out the courtroom, it's catching up with you.

11. roscuthiii

Posts: 2383; Member since: Jul 18, 2010

I could easily be wrong here which I freely admit to, but at a glance... Apple, it appears to me that you received the ITC ban you probably refused Samsung's offer on licensing prior to the court filing. At least that's usually how these things wind up in court over SEP/FRAND. You didn't like what you heard, bullishly moved forward... and are now crying. Just go back to competing on the store shelves.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.