We hold that the district court abused its discretion in determining that Apple established a sufficient causal nexus. In that light, we do not address Samsung’s argument with respect to the sufficiency of Apple’s allegations of harm.
Basically, I think they're saying "The district court made a technical mistake. We're not saying anything about who won the case." I think this means it goes back to trial. Any JDs want to correct me?
When they say "the district court abused its discretion in determining that Apple established a sufficient causal nexus" could they really be saying the district court didn't have the authority to make this determination?
Basically, I think they're saying "The district court made a technical mistake. We're not saying anything about who won the case." I think this means it goes back to trial. Any JDs want to correct me?