Apple just scored a major win in a federal appeals court, which could force Samsung to change its smartphones and tablets that infringe on Apple patents.

The U.S. Court of Appeals just sided with Apple, ruling that Cupertino is entitled to an injunction that would prevent Samsung from using Apple-patented technology in its devices.

Three major software features are at the core of this case: slide-to-unlock, auto correction for spelling errors, and quick linking — a feature that allows users to make phone calls by touching a phone number written in a text message.

A trial involving these features scored Apple another victory back in May 2014, when a jury ruled that Samsung had indeed infringed on key Apple patents. Apple won a $119.6 million damage award, but no sales injunction. Apple's main goal was to get sales injunctions rather than monetary awards, as it considers Samsung to have copied its technology and caused Apple great harm in doing so.

Apple holds patents for these three features and Samsung uses all three in its smartphones and tablets, grabbing a notable share of the U.S. smartphone market. The two archrivals went to court over this matter and U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh ruled last year in Samsung's favor regarding the injunction, denying Apple's request to bar Samsung from selling devices that use these three features.

That was hardly the end of it, however, as Apple went to the Appeals Court to further fight for its cause. In its appeal, Apple argued that the district court failed to recognize the extent to which Samsung's patent infringement would affect Apple's sales and market share.

Now, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reached a 2-1 ruling in Apple's favor, arguing that Koh should have assessed whether certain features, such as these three, play an important role in influencing consumers' decision to buy a particular device. The lower court had rejected evidence that phone sales are greatly influenced by unique features and ruled that Apple failed to prove that Samsung's infringement caused irreparable harm.

The appeals court now ruled that the lower court's decision to reject that evidence was a legal error, and that Samsung's patent infringement indeed caused irreparable harm.

According to the appeals court, Apple didn't have to prove that these three features were the reason consumers purchased Samsung smartphones instead of iPhones. Simply showing that those features were important to customers in assessing their phone choices should was sufficient, considering that the features were related to infringement.

"Apple established that customers wanted, preferred, and would pay extra for these features. Apple established that Samsung believed these features were important and copied them. The evidence establishes that Samsung's carriers and users wanted these features on phones. The evidence establishes that Apple believed these features were important to customer demand. The evidence establishes that Samsung was Apple's biggest rival, its fiercest competitor," the appeals court explains in its ruling (PDF).

"It was clear error in the face of this evidence for the district court to conclude that Apple failed to establish 'some connection' between the patented features and demand for the infringing products."

The ruling further notes that Samsung's infringement forced Apple to compete against its own patented inventions, in addition to causing Apple to lose market share and downstream sales. Moreover, the appeals court underscores that Apple proposed a reasonable injunction that was "narrowly tailored" so that it wouldn't cause Samsung any harm other than preventing it from continuing to use Apple's patented features.

According to the court, Samsung can remove the patented features it infringed upon without recalling any products.