GPNE Corp. v. Apple Inc.

Filing 523

PROPOSED VERDICT FORM. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on October 20, 2014. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/20/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

GPNE CORP.,
Plaintiff,
v.
APPLE, INC.,

14

Defendant.

15
16
17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

The parties shall file any objections to the proposed verdict form by Monday, October 20,
2014, at 8:15 p.m. Objections should not exceed 1 page in length.

18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
Dated: October 20, 2014

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

1
2
3
4
5

When answering the following questions and filling out this Verdict Form, please follow
the directions provided throughout the form. Your answer to each question must be unanimous.
Some of the questions contain legal terms that are defined and explained in detail in the Jury
Instructions. Please refer to the Jury Instructions if you are unsure about the meaning or usage of
any legal term that appears in the questions below.
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.
I. INFRINGEMENT

6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

1. For each of the following products, has GPNE proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Apple has infringed Claim 44 of the ’492 patent as to GPRS:
Please answer in each cell with “Infringed” (for GPNE) or “Not infringed” (for Apple).
GPNE does not accuse the below Apple products of infringement of Claim 44 of the
’492 patent as to LTE.
Apple Product

11
12

Literal Infringement
(GPRS only)

iPhone 4 (A1332)

13
14

iPhone 4S (A1387)

15
16

iPhone 5 (A1428)

17
18
iPad 2 (A1396)
19
20

iPad 3 (A1430)

21
22

iPad mini (A1454)

23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

Doctrine of Equivalents
(GPRS only)

1
2

2. For each of the following products, has GPNE proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Apple has infringed Claim 19 of the ’954 patent as to GPRS:

3

Please answer in each cell with “Infringed” (for GPNE) or “Not infringed” (for Apple).
GPNE does not accuse the below Apple products of infringement of Claim 19 of the
’954 patent as to LTE.

4

Apple Product

5
6

Literal Infringement
(GPRS only)

iPhone 4 (A1332)

7
8

iPhone 4S (A1387)

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

iPhone 5 (A1428)

11
12

iPad 2 (A1396)

13
14

iPad 3 (A1430)

15
16

iPad mini (A1454)

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

Doctrine of Equivalents
(GPRS only)

1
2
3
4
5

3. For each of the following products, has GPNE proven by a preponderance of the
evidence that Apple has infringed Claim 22 of the ’954 patent as to GPRS and/or
LTE:
Please answer in each cell with “Infringed” (for GPNE) or “Not infringed” (for Apple).
Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.
Apple Product

Literal Infringement

Doctrine of Equivalents

6
7

iPhone 4 (A1332)

GPRS
LTE

8
9

iPhone 4S (A1387)

LTE

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

iPhone 5 (A1428)

GPRS
LTE

12
13

GPRS

iPhone 5 (A1429)

N/A

GPRS

N/A

LTE
14
15

iPad 2 (A1396)

GPRS
LTE

16
17

iPad 3 (A1430)

GPRS
LTE

18
19

iPad 3 (A1403)

LTE

20
21
22

GPRS

iPad mini (A1454)

GPRS
LTE

iPad mini (A1455)

GPRS

N/A

23
LTE
24
25
26
27
28

4
Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

II. INVALIDITY

1
2
3
4

4. Has Apple proven by clear and convincing evidence that GPNE’s patent claims are
invalid?
Please answer in each cell with “Invalid” (for Apple) or “Valid” (for GPNE).
GPNE Asserted Claim

Invalid or Valid

5
’954 patent, Claim 19
6
7
8

’954 patent, Claim 22
’492 patent, Claim 44

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

III. DAMAGES (IF APPLICABLE)

11

If you find that Apple infringed any valid claim of the asserted patents, you must then
determine the amount of money damages to be awarded to GPNE to compensate GPNE for
Apple’s infringement.

12
13
14
15

5. What is the total dollar amount that GPNE is entitled to receive from Apple on the
claims on which you have ruled in favor of GPNE?
$_______________________________________________

16
17
18
19

6. For the total dollar amount in your answer to Question 5, please indicate whether
you calculated the amount based on a lump sum royalty or a per unit royalty by
writing down either “lump sum royalty” or “per unit royalty” on the line below.
_______________________________________________

20
21

If you answered “lump sum royalty” to Question 6, you do not need to answer
Question 7. If you answered “per unit royalty” to Question 6, please answer Question 7.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM

1
2

7. For the “per unit royalty,” please provide the dollar breakdown for each product
in the chart below.
Apple Product

Damages (in total dollars)

iPhone 4 (A1332)

$

iPhone 4S (A1387)

$

5

iPhone 5 (A1428)

$

6

iPhone 5 (A1429)

$

7

iPad 2 (A1396)

$

iPad 3 (A1430)

$

iPad 3 (A1403)

$

iPad mini (A1454)

$

iPad mini (A1455)

$

3
4

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

The individual amounts in each cell of Question 7 should add up to the total you have
listed in your answer to Question 5.
You have now reached the end of the verdict form and should review it to ensure it
accurately reflects your unanimous determinations. The Presiding Juror should then sign and date
the verdict form in the spaces below and notify the Bailiff that you have reached a verdict. The
Presiding Juror should retain possession of the verdict form and bring it when the jury is brought
back into the courtroom.

16
17

DATED: ____________, 2014

18

By:______________________________________
Presiding Juror

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

6
Case No.: 12-CV-02885-LHK
PROPOSED VERDICT FORM