Noting that "this Court has already performed significant irreparable harm analysis in this case", Koh concludes that Apple was not able to prove that the infringing features were directly driving demand for the 26 infringing products.
Neither statements about broad categories, nor evidence of copying, nor the conjoint survey provides sufficiently strong evidence of causation. Without a causal nexus, this Court cannot conclude that the irreparable harm supports entry of an injunction."
Judge Koh concludes, "In sum, to the limited extent that Apple has been able to show that any of its harms were caused by Samsung’s illegal conduct (in this case, only trade dress dilution), Apple has not established that the equities support an injunction. Accordingly, Apple’s motion for a permanent injunction is DENIED."
Koh also denied Samsung's request for a retrial on the basis of alleged juror misconduct.
Read More [Order]