Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

NOTE: This order is n0nprecedentia1. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit APPLE INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, V. SAMSUNG ELECTRON`ICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., AND SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, Defendants-Appellants. 2012-1506 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in case n0. 11-CV-1846, Judge Lucy H. Koh. ON MOTION Before BRYS0N, PRQST, and O’MALLEY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. 0 R D E R Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. move for a stay, pending appeal, of the preliminary injunction entered by the United States District Court for the Northern District APPLE INC. V SAMSUNG EI..ECTRONICS CO., LTD. 2 of California on June 26, 2012. Apple, Inc. opposes the motion. In deciding whether to grant a stay or injunction pending appeal, this court “assesses the movant’s chances of success on the merits and weighs the equities as they affect the parties and the public." E.I. Du,pont de Ne- mours & Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 835 F.2d 277 , 278 (Fed. Cir. 1987); see also Stor.ndard Hauens Procls. v. Gencor Indus., 897 F.Zd 511 (Fed. Cir. 1990). T0 prevail, a movant must establish a strong likelihood of success on the merits or, failing that, must demonstrate that it has a substantial case on the merits and that the harm factors militate in its favor. Hilton u. Braunskill, 481 U.S. 770, 778 (1987). Upon consideration thereof, IT ls ORDERED THAT: The motion is denied. FoR THE CoURT JUL 19 /s/ J an Horbaly Date J an Horbaly Clerk ccc Kathleen M. Sullivan, Esq. Michael A. Jacobs, Esq. s19 R$LLED PEALSFOH “~"`*-,?%“F;gg;iillpc\scurr JUL 179 2012 JANHUBBA|.Y CLERK