In February, Apple tried to obtain a preliminary injunction against Samsung, which would effectively take the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and a few other devices off the US shelves. Luckily Samsung won that round. The court couldn’t see how Apple would be irreparably harmed if Samsung products remained on the shelves.
Not ones to take a loss and live with it, Apple filed for an appeal. However this time, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) disagreed with the district court and granted Apple another chance to get an injunction. Though they agreed that three of the four patents were of questionable validity, they apparently thought Apple’s design patent was valid enough to grant them a chance to get an injunction. The lower courts felt that Apple’s design patent was invalid because it was created after both tablets were created, but the CAFC still believes that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 is similar enough to the iPad to make the patent non-obvious.
Since all tablets basically look the same from the front (unless they’re the XYBOARD), I don’t see why Apple picks on Samsung constantly. The back of the Tab 10.1 is very different from the iPad’s, while you could say the back of a Transformer Prime is a lot closer to that of an iPad. But no, it’s always Samsung. Some lawsuits were more fair than others, but going after the Galaxy Tab has always been unfair in my eyes. What do you think? Does the Tab 10.1 look too much like an iPad? Should Apple’s extremely generic design patents be upheld? Let us know what you think down below in the comments.