Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 17 JUNE 2026

Why Collision v. Samsung Is Actually A Win For Patent Owners

A federal judge's recent decision in Collision v. Samsung has opened a critical door for non-practicing entities seeking injunctive relief in patent cases. While the plaintiff didn't secure its injunction against Samsung's $445.5 million infringement, the court's explicit acknowledgment that NPEs may obtain injunctions under the eBay test fundamentally challenges two decades of precedent that effectively barred such remedies.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Authored by Babak Akhlaghi on May 31, 2026.  The conventional reading of the Collision v. Samsung decision misses the most significant part.

Yes, on May 17, 2026, Judge Gilstrap denied Collision Communications’ request for a permanent injunction against Samsung. Yes, Samsung can continue selling products that a jury found willfully infringed Collision’s wireless communication patents—products that generated a $445.5 millions verdict back in October 2025.

But there’s a different way to read this outcome.

Buried in that injunction denial is something far more significant: Judge Gilstrap expressly acknowledged that a non-practicing entity *may* be entitled to an injunction if it can satisfy the four-factor test established by eBay v. MercExchange.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from