Tentative verdict form1

Click here to load reader

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Tentative verdict form1

  • 1. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page1 of 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9SAN JOSE DIVISION10 APPLE, INC., a California corporation, ) Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK)For the Northern District of California11 Plaintiff, ) TENTATIVE VERDICT FORMv.)United States District Court12) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., )13 a Korean corporation;) SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., )14 a New York corporation;) SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS )15 AMERICA, LLC,) a Delaware limited liability company,)16) Defendants.)17))18 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., ) a Korean corporation;)19 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., ) a New York corporation;)20 SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS ) AMERICA, LLC,)21 a Delaware limited liability company,))22 Counterclaim-Plaintiffs, )v.)23) APPLE, INC., a California corporation, )24) Counterclaim-Defendant.)25)26We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them27 under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case.28 1 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

2. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page2 of 22FINDINGS ON APPLES CLAIMS 1 APPLES UTILITY AND DESIGN PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST SAMSUNG 2 1. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence 3that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/orSamsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 19 of the 381 4Patent? 5(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (forSamsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.) 6 SamsungSamsungSamsung 7 Accused Samsung ProductElectronicsElectronicsTelecommunications Co., Ltd.America, Inc.America, LLC 8Captivate (JX 1011) 9Continuum (JX 1016)Droid Charge (JX 1025)10Epic 4G (JX 1012)For the Northern District of California11Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)United States District Court12Fascinate (JX 1013)Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)13Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)14Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)15Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)16Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)17Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)18(JX 1037)Gem (JX 1020)19Indulge (JX 1026)20Infuse 4G (JX 1027)Mesmerize (JX 1015)21Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)22Replenish (JX 1024)Vibrant (JX 1010)2324252627282 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM 3. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page3 of 22 1 2. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidencethat Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or 2Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 8 of the 915 Patent? 3(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (forSamsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.) 4 SamsungSamsungSamsung 5 Accused Samsung ProductElectronicsElectronicsTelecommunications Co., Ltd.America, Inc.America, LLC 6Captivate (JX 1011) 7Continuum (JX 1016)Droid Charge (JX 1025) 8Epic 4G (JX 1012) 9Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)10Fascinate (JX 1013)Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)For the Northern District of California11Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)United States District Court12Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)13Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)14Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)JX 1033 (Galaxy S II (T-Mobile))15Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)16Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)(JX 1037)17Gem (JX 1020)18Indulge (JX 1026)Infuse 4G (JX 1027)19Intercept (JX 1009)20Mesmerize (JX 1015)Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)21Replenish (JX 1024)22Transform (JX 1014)Vibrant (JX 1010)2324252627283 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM 4. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page4 of 22 1 3. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidencethat Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or 2Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 50 of the 163Patent? 3(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (for 4Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.) 5 SamsungSamsungSamsung Accused Samsung ProductElectronicsElectronicsTelecommunications 6 Co., Ltd.America, Inc.America, LLC 7Captivate (JX 1011)Continuum (JX 1016) 8Droid Charge (JX 1025) 9Epic 4G (JX 1012)Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)10Fascinate (JX 1013)For the Northern District of California11Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)United States District Court12Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)13Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)14Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)15JX 1033 (Galaxy S II (T-Mobile))16Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)17(JX 1037)Gem (JX 1020)18Indulge (JX 1026)19Infuse 4G (JX 1027)Intercept (JX 1009)20Mesmerize (JX 1015)21Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)22Replenish (JX 1024)Transform (JX 1014)23Vibrant (JX 1010)24252627284 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM 5. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page5 of 22 4. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence 1that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), took action that it knew or should have knownwould induce STA or SEA to infringe the 381, 915, or 163 Patents? 2(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (for 3Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.) 4381 Patent915 Patent163 PatentAccused Samsung Product (Claim 19)(Claim 8) (Claim 50) 5Captivate (JX 1011) 6Continuum (JX 1016)Droid Charge (JX 1025) 7Epic 4G (JX 1012) 8Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)Fascinate (JX 1013) 9Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)10Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)For the Northern District of California11Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)United States District Court12Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)13Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)JX 1033 (Galaxy S II (T-Mobile))14Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)15Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE) (JX1037)16Gem (JX 1020)17Indulge (JX 1026)Infuse 4G (JX 1027)18Intercept (JX 1009)19Mesmerize (JX 1015)Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)20Replenish (JX 1024)21Transform (JX 1014)Vibrant (JX 1010)222324252627285 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM 6. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page6 of 22 5. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence 1that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/orSamsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D677 Patent? 2(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (for 3Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.) 4Samsung SamsungSamsungAccused Samsung ProductElectronics ElectronicsTelecommunications 5Co., Ltd. America, Inc.America, LLC 6Fascinate (JX 1013)Galaxy Ace (JX 1030) 7Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007) 8Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031) 9Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)10Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)For the Northern District of California11Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)United States District Court12Galaxy S Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)Infuse 4G (JX 1027)13Mesmerize (JX 1015)14Vibrant (JX 1010)1516 6. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidencethat Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or17Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D087 Patent?18(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (forSamsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)19Samsung SamsungSamsung20Accused Samsung ProductElectronics ElectronicsTelecommunicationsCo., Ltd. America, Inc.America, LLC21Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)22Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)23Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)24Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)25Infuse 4G (JX 1027)26Vibrant (JX 1010)27286 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM 7. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page7 of 22 7. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence 1that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/orSamsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D305 Patent? 2(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (for 3Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.) 4Samsung SamsungSamsungAccused Samsung ProductElectronics ElectronicsTelecommunications 5Co., Ltd. America, Inc.America, LLC 6Captivate (JX 1011)Continuum (JX 1016) 7Droid Charge (JX 1025) 8Epic 4G (JX 1012)Fascinate (JX 1013) 9Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)10Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)Galaxy S Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)For the Northern District of California11Gem (JX 1020)United States District Court12Indulge (JX 1026)Infuse 4G (JX 1027)13Mesmerize (JX 1015)14Vibrant (JX 1010)1516 8. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidencethat Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or17Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D889 Patent?18(Please answer in each cell with a Y for yes (for Apple), or with an N for no (forSamsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)19 SamsungSamsungSamsung20 Accused Samsung ProductElectronicsElectronicsTelecommunications Co., Ltd.America, Inc.America, LLC21Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)(JX 1037)22Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE) (JX231038)24252627287 Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM 8. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page8 of 22 If you did not answer Yes to any of Questions 1 through 8, please skip to Question 11, and do 1 not answer Questions 9 and 10. 2 9. If you found that Samsung Electronics America (SEA) or Samsung TelecommunicationsAmerica (STA) infringed in any of Questions 1 through 8, has Apple proven by a 3preponderance of the