United States Court of Appealsfor the Federal Circuit
__________________________ APPLE INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
AND
SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,LLC,
Defendants-Appellants.
__________________________
2012-1507
__________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for theNorthern District of California in case no. 12-CV-0630,Judge Lucy H. Koh.
__________________________
Decided: October 11, 2012
__________________________
M
ARK
A.
P
ERRY
, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, of Washington, DC, California, argued for the plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief were, J
OSH
A.
K
REVITT
and H.
M
ARK
L
YON
, of Palo Alto, California. Of counsel onthe brief were H
AROLD
J.
M
CELHINNY
, M
ICHAEL
A.
J
ACOBS
,R
ICHARD
S.
J.
H
UNG
and B
RIAN
R.
M
ATSUI
, Morrison &Foerster, LLP, of San Francisco, California.
APPLE INC
v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO
2
J
OHN
Q
UINN
, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan,LLP, of Los Angeles, California, argued for the defen-dants-appellants. On the brief were W
ILLIAM
C.
P
RICE
,P
ATRICK
M.
S
HIELDS
and D
EREK
L.
S
HAFFER
; and C
HARLES
K.
V
ERHOEVEN
, K
EVIN
P.B.
J
OHNSON
and V
ICTORIA
F.
M
AROULIS
, of Redwood Shores, California.K
EVIN
X.
M
C
G
ANN
, White & Case, LLP, of New York,New York, for amicus curiae, Google Inc. With him on thebrief was C
HRISTOPHER
J.
G
LANCY
.J
ONATHAN
N.
Z
ERGER
, Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.,of Kansas City, Missouri, for amicus curiae, Sprint Spec-trum, L.P. With him on the brief was A
NGEL
D.
M
ITCHELL
.
__________________________
Before P
ROST
, M
OORE
, and R
EYNA
,
Circuit Judges
.P
ROST
,
Circuit Judge
.Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd., Samsung Elec-tronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) appeal from thedistrict court’s order granting Apple, Inc., a preliminaryinjunction and enjoining Samsung from selling its GalaxyNexus smartphone. Because the district court abused itsdiscretion in entering an injunction, we reverse andremand.B
ACKGROUND
On February 8, 2012, Apple brought suit againstSamsung, alleging that Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus smart-phone infringes eight patents, including U.S. Patent No.8,086,604 (“’604 patent”), which is the only patent at issue
APPLE INC
v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO
3
in this appeal. Asserted independent claim 6 of the ’604patent is directed to an apparatus for “unified search”that uses heuristic modules to search multiple datastorage locations. Unified search refers to the ability toaccess information on more than one data storage locationthrough a single interface. For example, a deviceequipped with unified search allows the user to search thelocal memory of the device as well as the Internet byentering a single search query.The apparatus disclosed in claim 6 recites a specificand particular implementation of unified search that usesmodules to conduct the search. For the purpose of thisappeal, we assume that a search module is a softwareprogram or subroutine that employs a particular searchalgorithm. According to claim 6, when the user inputs asearch query in the unified search interface, the query issubmitted to different heuristic modules, each of which isassigned a predetermined search area. The search resultsthat are returned by the search modules are then gath-ered (and perhaps further filtered) and displayed to theuser. Claim 6 recites:6. An apparatus for locating information in a net-work, comprising:an interface module configured to receive an in-putted information descriptor from a user-inputdevice;
a plurality of heuristic modules
configured tosearch for information that corresponds to the re-ceived information descriptor, wherein:
each heuristic module
corresponds to a respec-tive area of search and
employs a different,
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
