2 
Though Apple won a fresh billion dollars in the US patent infringement case that saw Samsung basically lose everything, Apple won’t be able to kill Samsung products dead. Judge Lucy Koh, the federal judge that presided over Apple v. Samsung, has denied Apple a permanent injunction against Samsung. Samsung can still sell the products that infringed on Apple’s patents.
Along with that order, Judge Koh also denied Samsung a new trial on grounds of alleged jury misconduct. Apple is expected to appeal the ruling that denied the injunction. FOSS Patents says:
It may be unprecedented in the legal history of the United States for an injunction motion to be denied across the board despite such a large number of infringement findings (roughly half a dozen) by a jury and, especially, in light of the competitive situation between the two as well as the jury’s findings of willful infringement. If no injunction is ordered in such a case, it is hard to see how any patent holder could ever prevail on such a motion, and I doubt that this is what the appeals court will consider the right outcome. But the appeal will take a year or more, and in the meantime, this is a huge defensive success for Samsung’s lawyers.
So though Apple won the billion dollars, they weren’t able to oust Samsung products from the market. Which means, it’s still going to be Apple v. Samsung in the courts and in real life, for a very long time. [FOSS Patents]
Judge Denies HTC's Claim of Patent Infringement Against Apple
Research in Motion Denies BBX Infringement Claims, Doesn't Know What All the Fuss Is About
Apple Has Been Denied the Multitouch Trademark
Let me point out a couple of things that are wrong here…
The tablet in this case was found to be not infringing at all by the inconsistent jury, so there was never a risk of a permanent injunction on any tablets. In fact there was a temporary injunction that was lifted because of the outcome of this case.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/02/us-apple-samsung-idUSBRE89102320121002
Secondly, Apple haven’t got the billion dollars yet and there are plenty of reasons why Judge Koh should be looking at Samsung’s motion for a new trial. About 12 of which fall to the Jury foreman mostly for bringing really tainted patent knowledge in to the jury’s deliberations.
Read another source on this story, I have to take back the second part of my comment above.
“When it came to Hogan running his mouth in interviews post-trial, Koh said interviews couldn’t be submitted as evidence unless Hogan stated somewhere that he had come to his decision from outside knowledge in the case. Since he never said anything of the sort — no dice, Samsung.”
As I feared, Apple win on the fact not that Hogan was ever in the right, but because him running his mouth off about how bad his influence was cannot be considered because he didn’t say why he thought such stupid things.
Apple is in a good position to provide other companies an extra service with patents and name it iPatent. I’m sure many will be interested into this money making scheme?