The Obama administration halted a ban on older models of iPhones and iPads in a rare presidential move to overturn a decision by the International Trade Commission. 
 
 The announcement Saturday broke from a long tradition of administrations not intervening when the ITC issues import bans on products. The last time a ban was overturned was in 1987. 
 
 Text Size - 
 
 + 
 
 reset 
 
 U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman said he would stop both an import ban and a cease-and-desist order that would have required Apple to remove the products from its shelves. 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: Apple's lone-wolf strategy backfires) 
 
 In his letter to ITC Chairman Irving Williamson, Froman said the ability to license patents that are part of essential industry standards is “an important element of the administration’s policy of promoting innovation and economic progress.” One Samsung patent involved in the case is part of industry standards. 
 
 An Apple spokesperson said “we applaud the administration for standing up for innovation in this landmark case. Samsung was wrong to abuse the patent system in this way.” 
 
 A Samsung spokesperson said the firm was “disappointed” by the USTR’s decision. “The ITC’s decision correctly recognized that Samsung has been negotiating in good faith and that Apple remains unwilling to take a license,” the spokesperson said. 
 
 (PHOTOS: Politicians and their iToys) 
 
 The ITC import ban arose from a patent dispute at the ITC between Samsung and Apple. The quasi-judicial trade body agreed with the South Korean electronics firm that some iPhone 4 and iPad 2 models violated Samsung patents and ordered a ban on the import and sale of the products. 
 
 After the ITC issued its ruling in June, the decision underwent a 60-day presidential review period. 
 
 The case has generated intense interest in the technology industry because it’s part of a larger battle over whether companies that have agreed to make their patents part of industry standards can then seek injunctions or import bans against rival products over alleged patent violations. 
 
 Last week, a group of senators wrote a letter to Froman expressing concern that if the Apple ban is enacted, the tech industry’s standards-setting process could be jeopardized. 
 
 Follow @politico ||||| Samsung Electronics won a significant legal victory against Apple: a U.S. International Trade Commission ruling that threatens to halt U.S. sales of some older iPhones and iPads. The WSJ's Min-Jeong Lee has the story. 
 
 Samsung Electronics Co. won a significant legal victory against Apple Inc. that threatens to halt the sale of some iPhones and iPads in the U.S. 
 
 George Stahl explains the ramifications of a significant victory Samsung won over Apple in its patent case and how it is likely to result in a series of cross-licensing agreements between the companies. Photo: Getty Images. 
 
 The U.S. International Trade Commission on Tuesday ruled that Apple violated a Samsung patent covering technology used to send information over wireless networks. 
 
 Unless vetoed by President Barack Obama or blocked by an appeals court, the ruling would bar the importation of certain iPhones and iPads made to work on AT&T Inc.'s network. Among them are the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPad 3G, the iPad 2 3G and the iPad 3. 
 
 The latest Apple products, including the iPhone 5 and the fourth-generation of the iPad, were unaffected. 
 
 Once close business partners, Samsung and Apple have become increasingly intense rivals, sparring over the market for smartphones around the globe, with much of the momentum accruing to Samsung in recent months. 
 
 The rivalry has spilled into the courts, where barrages of competing patent claims have been lobbed in both directions. Last year, Apple won a jury trial and $1 billion in damages against Samsung over iPhone patents. Tuesday's ruling, which Apple has vowed to take to a federal appeals court, raises the incentives for the two sides to reach a more comprehensive settlement. But so far, both sides offered no hint at a settlement. 
 
 The ruling also came on the day Mr. Obama took steps to rein in companies that buy and enforce patents rather than make their own products and services—firms known as patent trolls by their detractors. He is also trying to reduce the growing use of the ITC to settle patent disputes. 
 
 The ITC, which has jurisdiction over certain trade practices, is an appealing legal option for patent holders, particularly tech companies, because the trade body can issue orders banning the importation of products that infringe upon another company's patents. Legal observers say it is easier to win an import ban at the ITC than it is to win a federal court ruling that would block product sales. 
 
 The ITC's decision against Apple was largely unexpected, particularly because the initial review by a judge at the agency had found Apple's products weren't infringing Samsung's patents. 
 
 The patent itself is a highly technical one, described in patent documents as "an apparatus and method for encoding/decoding a transport format combination indicator (TFCI) in a CDMA mobile communication system." 
 
 "We are disappointed that the Commission has overturned an earlier ruling and we plan to appeal," said Kristin Huguet, an Apple spokeswoman. She said the decision "has no impact on the availability of Apple products in the United States." 
 
 Apple doesn't detail sales for each individual product in its quarterly reports, but it has said that the iPhone makes up more than half of its global revenue. Sales in America, where the ban would take place, represented less than a third of overall sales. And aside from the iPhone 4S, which Apple said is popular with customers, the company hasn't detailed sales of its older models. 
 
 Gene Munster, an analyst at Piper Jaffray, estimates that world-wide sales of the iPhone 4—which stands to be affected by the ITC order—brought Apple $3.4 billion in revenue in the quarter ended in March. That compares with his estimate of $14.9 billion for the newer iPhone 5, which isn't affected. 
 
 The iPhone 4 has been marketed as a low-cost option alongside newer models. AT&T offers it for as little as 99 cents with a new contract. An AT&T spokesman didn't return a request for comment. 
 
 Apple's Ms. Huguet added that "Samsung is using a strategy which has been rejected by courts and regulators around the world." 
 
 Adam Yates, a spokesman for Samsung, said the decision affirmed the company's patents. "We believe the ITC's Final Determination has confirmed Apple's history of free-riding on Samsung's technological innovations," he said. 
 
 AP The Apple store in Santa Monica, Calif. 
 
 The ITC ruled against a key Apple theory across its recent litigation, which seeks to limit plaintiffs from using a broad class of patents to win injunctions against sales of infringing products. Such patents are submitted to industry groups that are setting key technology standards, and are deemed as essential to create products in certain categories—such as creating handsets that can communicate using a particular generation of cellular networks. 
 
 Apple has argued that in return for becoming part of an industry standard, companies usually promise those groups to license use of their patented technology under fair and reasonable terms. Apple says Samsung isn't doing that. 
 
 But the ITC said Apple's argument wasn't valid, potentially hurting Apple's continuing efforts to change the way standards-based patents are used in legal cases. 
 
 Brian Love, an assistant professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, said it was unclear whether Apple could find a technical workaround for the ruling. He said that companies are sometimes "overzealous" about labeling patents as essential parts of technology standards. 
 
 Kevin Taylor, an intellectual property lawyer at Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP, said this is "a solid win for Samsung." 
 
 But he said whether it would set any precedent would depend on the outcome of any appeal in federal court. He said it wouldn't be unusual for a court to temporarily delay the ruling from going into effect, allowing Apple to continue selling its devices during the appeal, which could take months or longer. 
 
 But, Mr. Taylor said, if "upheld on appeal, Apple has a big problem." 
 
 Lyle Vander Schaaf, an intellectual property lawyer at Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione, noted that it is rare for federal appeals courts to delay exclusion orders during appeals. And presidential vetoes are even more rare. 
 
 There hasn't been a veto "since the Carter administration," he said. "On first blush, this seems like a really impactful decision." 
 
 —Don Clark and Brent Kendall contributed to this article. 
 
 Write to Ian Sherr at ian.sherr@dowjones.com and Jessica E. Lessin at jessica.lessin@wsj.com
– The Obama administration has vetoed a ban on the import and sale of some older iPhone and iPad models, overturning a decision by the International Trade Commission for the first time since 1987, Politico reports. The ITC issued an import ban and cease-and-desist on sales for some models of the iPhone 4 and iPad 2 back in June after Samsung claimed they infringed on its patents. But in a letter to the ITC (which you can read in full at All Things Digital, but it's full of legalese), US Trade Representative Michael Froman said it was nixing the ban, as the government is concerned about patent holders gaining "undue leverage," the Wall Street Journal reports. "We applaud the administration for standing up for innovation in this landmark case," says an Apple spokesperson, per Politico. "Samsung was wrong to abuse the patent system in this way." Samsung says it is "disappointed," as "the ITC’s decision correctly recognized that Samsung has been negotiating in good faith and that Apple remains unwilling to take a license," All Things Digital reports. Froman says Samsung can still pursue its patent rights through the judicial system.