The presidential veto was announced on Saturday by Michael Froman, the US Trade Representative, who was formally responsible for reviewing the case. The decision was overturned because of "the effect on competitive conditions in the US economy and their effect on US consumers," he said in a letter announcing the decision.
Washington's intervention on behalf of Apple marks the second key victory the US company has scored on its home turf against Samsung, after more than two years of legal wrangling over rights to technology in the booming smartphone and tablet markets. A year ago a US court sided with Apple in a separate case and ordered Samsung to pay $1 bn in damages, though the amount was later reduced on appeal.
(Read more: Cramer: Apple should buy Yelp for $75 per share)
The ITC case turned on a Samsung patent covering a technology which is included in standards followed by all makers of phones and tablets. Companies with so-called standards-essential patents are required to license them on less onerous terms than other intellectual property, a stipulation that Apple claimed Samsung had failed to follow.
Apple said in a statement after the successful review: "We applaud the administration for standing up for innovation in this landmark case. Samsung was wrong to abuse the patent system in this way."
In his letter announcing the decision, Mr Froman quoted from a policy statement about standards-essential patents earlier this year, in which the Department of Justice and US Patent and Trademark office. The agencies expressed concerns about how companies owning these patents might be able to use them to block competitors from entering their markets, hurting competition.
Mr Froman said he "strongly share[d]" that position, and that there was risk of holders of these patents "gaining undue leverage and engaging in 'patent hold-up.'" Standards "have come to play an increasingly important role in the US economy," he added.
The likelihood of an import ban against a company widely seen as the most innovative US technology concern of the past decade had already started to raise political concerns in Washington, with several senators last week writing to express their concern.
However, patent experts had also warned about the risk of intervening to overturn a patent right that had been upheld at the ITC – particularly since the US has made respect for intellectual property rights a cornerstone of its trade policy.
(Read more: Apple's new iPhone may have fingerprint sensor)
"The administration is committed to promoting innovation and economic progress, including through providing adequate and effective protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights," Mr Froman said. "My decision in this case does not mean that the patent owner in this case is not entitled to a remedy," Mr Froman said. "On the contrary, the patent owner may continue to pursue its rights through the courts."