United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
APPLE INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A KOREAN
CORPORATION, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
AMERICA, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION,
SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY,
Defendants-Appellees
______________________
2014-1802
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California in No. 5:12-cv-00630-LHK,
Judge Lucy H. Koh.
______________________
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
______________________
Before PROST, Chief Judge, MOORE, and REYNA, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM.
2 APPLE INC. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
ORDER
Appellees Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung
Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”) filed a petition for
rehearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by
the court and filed by appellant Apple, Inc. The petition and
response were referred to the panel that heard the appeal.
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1) Samsung’s petition for rehearing is granted by a majority
of the panel for the limited purpose of modifying the pre-
viously filed majority opinion. Page 17 of the original
opinion reads: “Apple did not establish that that these
features were the exclusive or significant driver of cus-
tomer demand, which certainly would have weighed
more heavily in its favor. We conclude that this factor
weighs in favor of granting Apple’s injunction.” The
corrected opinion reads:
Apple did not establish that these features
were the exclusive driver of customer de-
mand, which certainly would have
weighed more heavily in its favor. Apple
did, however, show that “a patented fea-
ture is one of several features that cause
consumers to make their purchasing deci-
sions.” Apple III, 735 F.3d at 1364. We
conclude that this factor weighs in favor of
granting Apple’s injunction.
The dissenting opinion was also amended. Samsung’s
petition is denied in all other respects.
2) The prior opinions in this appeal, which issued on
September 17, 2015, and were reported at Apple Inc. v.
Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., 801 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir.
2015), are withdrawn and replaced with the revised
opinions accompanying this order.
APPLE INC. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. 3
FOR THE COURT
December 16, 2015 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Date Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court