Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al

Filing 3446

TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on March 4, 2016. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/4/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

APPLE INC.,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.,
et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

The Court’s tentative verdict form is attached as Exhibit A. The parties shall file any

19

comments to this verdict from by Friday, March 11, 2016.

20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

Dated: March 4, 2016
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28

1
Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

EXHIBIT A

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

APPLE INC.,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
VERDICT FORM

v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.,
et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them
under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case.

19

FINDINGS ON APPLE’S DAMAGES CLAIMS

20
21
22
23
24

1. What is the total dollar amount that Apple is entitled to receive in damages from
Samsung?
$

.

2. For the total dollar amount in your answer to Question 1, please provide the dollar
breakdown by patent and by product. (Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked
out.)

25
26
27
28

3
Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

15

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

28

16
06/16/2011
to
06/30/2012

Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

27

4

Total

Vibrant
(JX1010)

Mesmerize
(JX1015)

Galaxy S
Showcase
(JX1017)

No Double
Recovery

No Double
Recovery

No Double
Recovery

12

Galaxy S4G
(JX1019)

8
No Double
Recovery4

06/16/2011
to
06/30/20123

7

04/15/2011
to
06/15/20112

’163

5

Fascinate
(JX1013)

04/15/2011
to
05/29/2011

14

08/04/2010
to
04/14/2011

13

Damages
Period:

11
D’305 or D’087
or D’6771

10

D’677 Alone

9

’915

6

’381

08/04/2010
to
06/30/2012

Total

3

Patent

2

4

All 5 products infringe the D’677 Patent. All 5 products infringe the D’305 Patent. The Galaxy S4G and Vibrant infringe the D’087
Patent. The Fascinate, Galaxy S Showcase, and Mesmerize do not infringe the D’087 Patent and are not eligible for an award based
on that patent.
2
The D’677 is the only design patent eligible for damages from April 15, 2011 to June 15, 2011.
3
All three Apple design patents are eligible for damages from June 16, 2011 to June 30, 2012. In this case, Apple seeks Samsung’s
profits from sales of products that infringe Apple’s design patents. You may award to Apple Samsung’s total profit attributable to the
infringing products. However, Apple may only recover that form of damages once per unit, no matter how many design patents were
infringed by that unit.
4
“No Double Recovery” indicates that units that infringed this patent in this time period also infringed one or more design patents and
thus no further damages may be awarded.

1

United States District Court
Northern District of California
1

1

___________________________________

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4

Dated:
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM