Haven't Apple only won the interim injunction in German? This injunction was heavily criticized in and (AFAIK) effectively removed by the UK decision, and Apple had applied for it to be withdrawn anyway.
> Secondly I cannot see any basis for an interim injunction. The UK court had already granted a final declaration. Moreover it was sitting not just as a UK court but as a Community Court. Interim injunctions are what you grant in urgent cases where there is not enough time to have a full trial on the merits. That was not this case. [...] Further Judge Birss was not sitting as a purely national court. [...] So his declaration of non-infringement was binding throughout the Community. It was not for a national court - particularly one not first seized - to interfere with this Community wide jurisdiction and declaration.
> Finally I regret to say that I find the Oberlandesgericht's reasoning on the merits sparse in the extreme
> If courts around Europe simply say they do not agree with each other and give inconsistent decisions, Europe will be the poorer.
To clarify to both this and the other comment, Apple has won certain suits in both Germany and Japan and lost others, just as it has lost certain motions in the US. I did not mean to imply that Apple had never lost any legal motion in both those countries, just that courts had found in their favour in those countries in some cases. I think that's what the OP was asking.
Is the US the only country to have found in Apple's favour in these cases?