Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 326

PROPOSED JURY VERDICT FORMS by Mirror Worlds Technologies, Inc., Mirror Worlds, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(Solo, Alexander) Modified on 8/23/2010 (kls, ).

Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc.

Doc. 326 Att. 2

Dockets.Justia.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION MIRROR WORLDS, LLC Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC. Defendant. APPLE INC. Counterclaim Plaintiff v. MIRROR WORLDS, LLC, MIRROR WORLDS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Counterclaim Defendants. APPLE INC.'S PROPOSED VERDICT FORM JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Civil Action No. 6:08-CV-88 LED

In answering these questions, you are to follow all of the instructions I have given you in the Court's Charge. I. INFRINGEMENT OF MIRROR WORLDS' PATENTS A. Did Mirror Worlds prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple directly

infringed the listed claims of the '227 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the accused products in the United States? Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim and product (skip line marked "N/A"): Mac OS X 10.4 Running on Apple Computer Claim 13 Claim 14 Claim 15 Claim 16 Claim 17 Claim 20 Claim 22 ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ N/A Mac OS X 10.5 or 10.6 Running on Apple Computer ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

B.

Did Mirror Worlds prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple directly

infringed the listed claims of the '313 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell Mac OS X 10.5 or 10.6 running on an Apple computer in the United States? Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim:

-1-

Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 3 Claim 4 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11

________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

C.

Did Mirror Worlds prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple directly

infringed the listed claims of the '427 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell the accused products in the United States? Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim and product (skip lines marked "N/A"): Mac OS X 10.5 or 10.6 Running on Apple Computer Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 5 Claim 7 Claim 8 Claim 9 Claim 10 ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad iPod Classic and iPod Nano iTunes Running on Apple Computer N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Safari 4 Running on Apple Computer N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

-2-

Mac OS X 10.5 or 10.6 Running on Apple Computer Claim 13 Claim 15 Claim 16 Claim 17 Claim 18 Claim 19 Claim 22 Claim 24 Claim 25 Claim 26 Claim 29 Claim 31 Claim 32 Claim 33 Claim 34 Claim 37 Claim 39 D. ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________

iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad

iPod Classic and iPod Nano

iTunes Running on Apple Computer N/A N/A ________ ________ ________ ________ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ________ N/A ________ N/A N/A

Safari 4 Running on Apple Computer N/A N/A ________ ________ ________ ________ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ________ N/A ________ N/A N/A

N/A N/A ________ ________ ________ ________ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A ________ ________ ________ ________ N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Did Mirror Worlds prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple directly

infringed claim 1 of the '999 Patent by making, using, selling, and/or offering to sell (i) any

-3-

Apple computer or device containing or utilizing Mac OS X 10.5 or 10.6 or Mac OS X Server 10.5 or 10.6 and (ii) an Apple enterprise server in the United States? Answer "Yes" or "No" ______________

-4-

II.

INVALIDITY OF MIRROR WORLDS' PATENTS A. Did Apple prove that the listed claims of the '227 Patent are invalid for any of the

following reasons? For invalidity defenses based on prior art that was not considered by the USPTO during the prosecution of the '227 Patent, Apple must have proved invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. For all other invalidity defenses, Apple must have proved invalidity by clear and convincing evidence. Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim and defense: 1. Anticipation by Prior Art Claim 13 Claim 14 Claim 15 Claim 16 Claim 17 Claim 20 Claim 22 2. Obviousness 3. Lack of Adequate Written Description ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ 4. Lack of Enablement

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

B.

Did Apple prove that the listed claims of the '313 Patent are invalid for any of the

following reasons? For invalidity defenses based on prior art that was not considered by the USPTO during the prosecution of the '313 Patent, Apple must have proved invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. For all other invalidity defenses, Apple must have proved invalidity by clear and convincing evidence. -5-

Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim and defense: 1. Anticipation by Prior Art Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 3 Claim 4 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 C. 2. Obviousness 3. Lack of Adequate Written Description ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ 4. Lack of Enablement

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

Did Apple prove that the listed claims of the '427 Patent are invalid for any of the

following reasons? For invalidity defenses based on prior art that was not considered by the USPTO during the prosecution of the '427 Patent, Apple must have proved invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. For all other invalidity defenses, Apple must have proved invalidity by clear and convincing evidence. Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim and defense: 1. Anticipation by Prior Art Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 5 2. Obviousness 3. Lack of Adequate Written Description ___________ ___________ ___________ 4. Lack of Enablement

___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________

-6-

1. Anticipation by Prior Art Claim 7 Claim 8 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 13 Claim 15 Claim 16 Claim 17 Claim 18 Claim 19 Claim 22 Claim 24 Claim 25 Claim 26 Claim 29 Claim 31 Claim 32 Claim 33 Claim 34 Claim 37 Claim 39

2. Obviousness

3. Lack of Adequate Written Description ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

4. Lack of Enablement

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ -7-

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

D.

Did Apple prove that claim 1 of the '999 Patent is invalid for any of the following

reasons? For invalidity defenses based on prior art that was not considered by the USPTO during the prosecution of the '999 Patent, Apple must have proved invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. For all other invalidity defenses, Apple must have proved invalidity by clear and convincing evidence. Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed defense: 1. Anticipation by Prior Art Claim 1 ___________ 2. Obviousness 3. Lack of Adequate Written Description ___________ 4. Lack of Enablement 5. Improper Inventorship

___________

___________

___________

-8-

III.

UNENFORCEABILITY OF MIRROR WORLDS' PATENTS A. Did Apple prove by clear and convincing evidence that the '227 Patent is

unenforceable for inequitable conduct? Answer "Yes" or "No" B. ______________

Did Apple prove clear and convincing evidence that the '313 Patent is

unenforceable for inequitable conduct? Answer "Yes" or "No" C. ______________

Did Apple prove clear and convincing evidence that the '427 Patent is

unenforceable for inequitable conduct? Answer "Yes" or "No" D. ______________

Did Apple prove clear and convincing evidence that the '999 patent is

unenforceable for inequitable conduct? Answer "Yes" or "No" ______________

-9-

If you found in Questions I. A through D that Mirror Worlds proved that Apple infringed at least one claim of the Mirror Worlds Patents (a "Yes" answer to any claim) and you found in Questions II. A through D that Apple did not prove that any infringed claim was invalid (a "No" answer to any claim for which you found infringement) and you found in Questions III. A through D that Apple did not prove that any infringed and valid claim was unenforceable (a "No" answer to any claim for which you found infringement and did not find invalidity), then answer Questions IV and V. Otherwise skip to Question VI.

IV.

WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT OF MIRROR WORLDS' PATENTS A. Did Mirror Worlds prove by clear and convincing evidence that Apple's

infringement of any valid and enforceable claim was willful? Answer "Yes" or "No" ______________

-10-

V.

DAMAGES FOR INFRINGEMENT OF MIRROR WORLDS' PATENTS A. What date did you determine damages for infringement of the Mirror Worlds'

patents should begin? Date: ______________ B. What sum of money, if any, if paid now in cash, do you find should be awarded to

Mirror Worlds as damages adequate to compensate it for the valid patent claims you have found to have been infringed? Only award damages for those claims you find infringed, valid, and enforceable. Do not award damages for claims that you did not find infringed, valid, and enforceable. Answer: C. ______________ You have heard testimony regarding a "running royalty," which is a royalty

determined by the amount of use of the purported invention over time. You have also heard testimony regarding a "lump sum paid up royalty," which is a fixed amount paid to the patent holder regardless of the amount of use of the purported invention over time. If you have awarded reasonable royalty damages above, is that award based on a "running royalty" or a "lump sum paid up royalty"? Answer: ______________

-11-

VI.

INFRINGEMENT OF APPLE'S PATENT A. Did Apple prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Mirror Worlds

Technologies ("MWT") infringed the listed claims of the Apple Patent directly, indirectly, literally or under the Doctrine of Equivalents? Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim: Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 3 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 7 Claim 8 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 12 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

-12-

VII.

INVALIDITY OF APPLE'S PATENT A. Did MWT prove that the listed claims of the '101 Patent are invalid for any of the

following reasons? For anticipation by prior art that was not considered by the USPTO during the prosecution of the '101 Patent, MWT must have proved invalidity by a preponderance of the evidence. For all other invalidity defenses, MWT must have proved invalidity by clear and convincing evidence. Answer "Yes" or "No" for each listed claim and defense: 1. Anticipation by Prior Art ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ 2. Obviousness ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

Claim 1 Claim 2 Claim 3 Claim 4 Claim 5 Claim 6 Claim 7 Claim 8 Claim 9 Claim 10 Claim 11 Claim 12

-13-

If you found in Question VI that Apple proved that the Mirror Worlds Parties infringed at least one claim of the Apple Patent (a "Yes" to any claim), and you found in Questions VII that MWT did not prove that any infringed claim was invalid (a "No" to any claim for which you found infringement) then answer Questions VIII and IX. Otherwise you are finished, and the foreperson should sign and date the last page of this Verdict Form.

VIII. WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT OF APPLE'S PATENT A. Did Apple prove by clear and convincing evidence that MWT's infringement of

any valid claim was willful? Answer "Yes" or "No" IX. ______________

DAMAGES FOR INFRINGEMENT OF APPLE'S PATENT A. What date did you determine damages for infringement of Apple's Patent should

begin? Date: ______________ B. What sum of money, if any, if paid now in cash, do you find should be awarded to

Apple as damages adequate to compensate it for the valid patent claims you have found to have been infringed? Only award damages for those claims you find infringed and valid. Do not award damages for claims that you did not find infringed and valid. Answer: ______________

-14-

Signed this ____ day of September, 2010: ________________________________ JURY FOREPERSON

-15-