Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page1 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK DOcument1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page10f2O
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`X:“s&(N‘o.: ll-CV—0l846-LHK
`
`VERDICT ORM
`
`) ) ) 3
`
`APPLE INC., 21 California‘corporation,
`
`V.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`)
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`)
`a Korean corporation;
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., )
`a New York corporation;
`)
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`)
`AMERICA, LLC,
`)
`a Delaware limited liability company,
`
`) ) )
`
`Defendants.
`
`l )
`
`)
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`)
`a Korean corporation;
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC, )
`a New York corporation;
`'
`)
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`)
`AMERICA, LLC,
`)
`a Delaware limited liability company,
`_ )
`
`) ) ) ) ) ) )
`
`Counterclaim—Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`APPLE INC., a California corporation,
`
`Counterclaim-Defendant.
`
` J
`
`We, thejury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them
`under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case.
`
`Case No.: l l-CV-01846-LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStates
`
`
`
`
`DistrictCourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`15
`
`17
`
`18
`
`20
`
`22
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`.27
`
`28
`
`

`
`t~J
`
`-I31.»
`
`.3‘O06‘--JC\U‘:_‘
`
`
`
`-11
`
`r—- IQ
`
`H-I U3
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`UnitedStates_D1strIct
`
`
`
`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page2 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 -Fi|edO8/24/12 Page2 of 20
`
`FINDINGS ON APPLE’S CLAIMS
`
`APPLE’S UTILITY AND DESIGN PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST SAMSUNG
`
`1. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
`Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 19 of the ’38l
`Patent?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`' Fascinate (JX 1013)
` - Galaxy Tab (IX 1036)
`
`
`
`V
`
`"Y
`
`Case No.'. 11—CV-01846—LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page3 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page3 of 20
`
`2. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by" a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), andlor
`Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 3 of the ’915 Patent?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`Fascinate (JX 1013)
`
`Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
`
`Galaxy Prevail (IX 1022)
`
`Galaxy s (£9000) (JX 1007)
`
`Galaxy s 4G (JX 1019)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (AT&T) (IX 1031)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (19100) (JX 1032)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (T—M0biie) (IX 1033)
`
`Galaxy Tab (IX 1036)
`
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi) (JX 1037)
`
`I
`
`Gem (JX 1020)
`
`Indulge (IX 1026)
`
`Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
`
`Intercept (JX 1009)
`
`Mesmerize (JX I 015)
`
`Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
`
`Replenish (JX 1024)
`
`Transform (JX 1014)
`
`Vibrant (IX 1010)
`
`F
`
`
`
`H _.~<~<~<~<~<~<~<‘<~42Z
`
`Case No.: 11-CV—01846-LHK
`VERDlCT FORM
`
`E E
`
`*:«..‘25:
`on
`UL)
`‘._.{-I-4
`.23
`+3.2
`IF?)Q...
`3D
`13E'1)
`3134:
`gt’.00
`3:2:0
`SE
`.’6F-T—«
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page4 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|tedO8/24/12 Page4 of 20
`
`3. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
`Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 50 of the ’163
`Patent?
`.
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`‘JR
`
`
`
`3~%»-><?.?a7'r-J:
`
`.,
`
`-.1
`
`-.
`
`nae.-v-.A&ef
`
`
`
`)
`
`
`
` H
`
`M. M r
`
`J
`
`‘V
`
`V‘
`
`
`
`
`
`\DO<5'--JON
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`
`
`
`
`Case N0.: 1 1-CV-01846-Li-IK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page5 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page5 of 20
`
`4. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) took action that it knew or should have known
`would induce STA or SEA to infringe the ’381, ’915, or ’163 Patents?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`Captivate (JX 1011)
`
`Continuum (JX 1016)
`
`Droid Charge (IX 1025)
`
`Epic 4G (JX 1012)
`
`Exhibit 4G -(JX 1028)
`
`Fascinate (JX 1013)
`
`Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
`
`Galaxy S 4G (IX 1019)
`
`Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
`
`Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
`
`_
`
`-
`
`Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)
`
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi) (JX 1037)
`
`Gem (IX 1020)
`
`Indulge (JX 1026)
`
`Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
`
`Intercept (JX 1009)
`
`Mesmerize (JX 1015)
`
`Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
`
`Replenish (JX 1024)
`
`Transform (JX 1014)
`
`Vibrant (JX 1010)
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Case No.: ll-CV-01 846-LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page6 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page6 Of 20
`
`5. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) and/or Samsung Telecommunications America
`(STA) has infringed the D’677 Patent?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`-
`
`Fascinate (JX i013)
`
`fi
`-1-
`
`
`mE
`
`;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ammmmmm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) and/or Samsung Telecommunications America
`(STA) has infringed the D’087 Patent?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`. Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_ Galaxy s (19000) (JX 1007) n _
`Galaxy s 4G (JX 1019) n
`Galaxy s 11 (AT&T) (JX 1031) E __
`Galaxy s 11 (19100) (JX 1032) —
`
`L Nm“9
`
`
`
`Case No.: 1l—CV-01846-LHK
`VERDECT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`.19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22'
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`
`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page7 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page? of 20
`
`7.
`
`For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) and/or Samsung Telecommunications America
`(STA) has infringed the D305 Patent‘?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), -or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`‘I
`:-
`‘I “
`V
`
`A
`
`A
`
`For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
`Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D’889 Patent‘?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`N C
`
`Galaxy Tab 101 (WiFi) (IX 1037) E
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE)
`'
`(IX 1038)
`
`ase No.: l 1-CV-01 846—LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page8 of 20
`Case5:11—cv-_Oi1§34_6—LHK Document1931 Fi|,edO8/24/12 Page8 of 20
`
`Ifyou did not answer “Yes” to any of Questions 1 through 8, please skip to Question 11, and do
`not answer Questions 9 and 10.
`
`9.
`
`If you found that Samsung Electronics America (SEA) or Samsung Telecommunications
`America (STA) infringed in any of Questions 1 through 8, has Apple proven. by a _
`_
`preponderance of the evidence that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) took action that it
`knew or should have known would induce SEA or STA to infringe the D’677, D’087,
`D’305, and/or D’889 Patents?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`H:
`
`Captivate (IX 1011)
`
`Continuum (IX 1016)
`
`Droid Charge (IX 1025)
`
`'
`
`Epic 4G (IX 1012)
`
`Fascinate (JX 1013)
`
`Galaxy S 4G (IX 1019)
`
`Galaxy S II (AT&T)
`'
`I
`Galaxy Sill (T—Mobile)
`JX 1033
`
`Galaxy S H (Epic 4G Touch)
`(IX 1034)
`Galaxy S II (Skyrocket)
`(JX 1035)
`Galaxy S Showcase (i500)
`JX 1017
`
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi)
`(IX 1037)
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE)
`JX 1038
`
`Gem (IX 1020)
`
`Indulge (JX 1026)
`
`Infuse 4G (IX 1027)
`
`Mesmerize (JX 1015)
`
`Vibrant (JX 1010)
`
`Case No.: ll-CV—0l 846-LI-1K
`VERDICT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page9 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page9_of2O
`
`10. If you answered “Yes” to any of Questions 1 through 9, and thus found that any
`Samsung entity has infringed any Apple patent(s), has Apple proven by clear and
`convincing evidence that the Samsung entity’s infringement was willful?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung).)
`
`’381 Patent (Claim 19)
`
`’915 Patent (Claim 8)
`
`‘I63 Patent (Claim 50)
`D’677 Patent
`
`
`
`D’087 Patent
`
`D’305 Patent
`
`D’889 Patent
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`Court_FortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`11.
`
`Has Samsung proven by clear and convincing evidence that Apple’s asserted utility
`and/or design patent claims are invalid?
`
`’381 Patent (Claim 19)
`
`Yes __ (for Samsung)
`
`No\/
`
`(for Apple)
`
`"3915 Patent [Claim 8)
`
`Yes WWWWW (for Samsung)
`
`No
`
`l/’
`
`(for Apple)
`
`’I63 Patent (Claim 50)
`
`Yes i_ (for Samsung)
`
`No ___L{:_ (for Apple)
`
`D’677 Patent
`
`D’087 Patent
`
`D’305 Patent
`
`D’889 Patent
`
`Yesj (for Samsung)
`
`No
`
`(for Apple)
`
`YesT (for Samsung)
`
`No Wlfw (for Apple)
`
`YesT (for Samsung)
`
`No ____L€_ (for Apple)
`
`YesT (for Samsung)
`
`N0 _L4(f0r Apple)
`
`Case No.: 1]-CV-O1846—LI-{K
`VERDiCT FORM
`
`9
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page10 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Pagelo of 20
`
`APPLE’S TRADE DRESS CLAIMS AGAINST SAMSUNG
`
`Protectabiligg
`
`12. Has Samsung proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple’s registered iPhone
`trade dress ’983 is not protectabie?
`.
`Yes (not protectable — for Samsung)
`No (protectable — for Apple) \/
`
`13. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidencethat Apple’s. unregistered trade
`dresses are protectable?
`(Please answer with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with
`
`“N” for “no” (for Samsung).)
`
`
`
`
`«H
`~r“‘
`Unregrstered iPone 3G Trade Dress
`Unregistered Combination iPhone Trade Dress
`Unregistered iPad/iPad 2 Trade Dress
`
`3;}
`
`
`
`
`
`Trade Dress Dilution
`
`14. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple’s trade dresses are
`famous?
`
`(Please answer with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N”_ for “no” (for Samsung).)
`
`$3 n
`J.
`at
`‘P39
`
`Registered iP one Trade Dress
`
`-1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.'. 11-CV-01346-LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`10
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`\OO'O'--JON
`
`'10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page11 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page11of2O
`
`Ifyou did notfind the registered iPhone trade dress protectable andfamous, please skip to
`Question 16, and do not answer Question 15.
`
`15. If you found the registered iPhone trade dress pr-otectable and famous, for each of the
`following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung
`Electronics Co. (SEC) and/or Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has diluted
`the registered iPhone trade dress?
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung).)
`.
`
`
`
`3
`
`I’
`
`L
`
`L -
`
`N
`
`V
`
`.
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Captivate (1)5011)
`Continuum (JX 1016)
`Droid Charge (IX 1025)
`
`Epic 4G (IX 1012)
`
`Fascinate (JX 1013)
`
`‘f
`
`- Galaxy Prevail (IX 1022)
`
`1
`
`N.
`N
`
`e N
`
`V
`
`
`
`Galaxy s 11 (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
`C
`
`Case No.: ll-CV-01846—LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`11
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page12 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|e_dQ8/24/12 Page12 O_f 20
`
`Ifyou "did notfind the unregistered iPhone 3G trade dress protectable andfamous, please skip to
`Question 1 7, and do not answer Question 16.
`
`16. If you found the unregistered iPhone 3G trade dress protectable and famous, for each of
`the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
`Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) and/or Samsung Telecommunications America (STA)
`has diluted the unregistered iPhone 3G trade dress?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no" (for
`Samsung).)
`
`10
`
`11
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Galaxy s 4G (IX 1019)
`
`Galaxy s 11 (AT&T) (JX 1031)
`
`Galaxy s 11 (19100) (JX 1032)
`
`Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
`
`Mesmerize (JX 1015)
`
`_
`
`Vibrant (JX 1010)
`
`Case No.: 11-CV—O184-6-LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`12
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page13 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page13 of 20
`1"-
`
`Ifyou did notfina’ the unregistered Combination iPhone trade dress pmlectable andfamous,
`please skip to Question 18, and do not answer Question I 7.
`
`17. If you found the unregistered Combination iPhone trade dress protectable and famous,
`for each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
`that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC) and/or Samsung Telecommunications America
`(STA) has diluted the unregistered Combination iPhone trade dress?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung).)
`
` Captivate (IX 1011)
`
`Continuum (JX 1016)
`Droid Charge (IX 1025)
`
`Epic 4G (IX 1012)
`
`Fascinate (JX 1013)
`
`Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
`
`Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
`
`Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
`
`Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (AT&T) (JX 1031)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (i9100) (JX 1032)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (Epic 4G Touch) (J X 1034)
`
`Galaxy S 11 (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
`
`Galaxy S 11 Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
`
`Infuse 4G (IX 1027)
`
`Mesmerize (JX 1015)
`
`Vibrant (JX 1010)
`
`Case No.: 11—CV-0l846—Ll-IK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`13
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12'
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`H
`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page14 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page14 of 20
`
`ifyou did notfind the unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade dress protectable andfamous, please skip
`to Question 19, and do not answer Question 18.
`
`18. If you found the unregistered iPadliPad 2 trade dress protectable and famous, for each
`of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
`Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or Samsung
`Telecommunications America (STA) has diluted the unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade
`dress?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung).)
`
`
`
`.15.
`Galaxy Tab 110.41" (win)
`(JX 1037)
`
`Galaxy Tab 10.1
`(40 LTE) (IX 103 3)
`
`'
`
`'1
`
`1
`
`1'
`
`Ifyou did not answer “Yes” to any of Questions 15 through 18, please skip to Question 20, and
`do not answer Question 19.
`
`19. If you answered “Yes” to any of Questions 15 through 18, and thus found that any
`Samsung entity has diluted any Apple trade dress(es), has Apple proven by a
`preponderance of the evidence that the Samsung entity’s dilution was willful?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for _
`Samsung).)
`
`
`
`.M a
`
`A
`
`
`
`
`
`.
`
`_
`
`"
`
`Y
`
`i\{
`
`‘
`
`.
`
`5}?‘
`
`u
`
`xx 2'31
`
`Registered 1Phone Trade
`Dress
`
`Unregistered iPhone 3
`Trade Dress
`
`Unregistered Combination
`iPhone Trade Dress
`
`Unregistered iPad/iPad 2
`Trade Dress
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`Trade Dress Infringement
`
`Ifyou did notfind the unregistered iPadflPad 2 trade dress protectable, please skip to Question
`22, and do not answer Questions 20 and 21.
`
`20. If you found the unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade dress protectable, for each of the
`following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung
`14
`
`Case No.1 1 1-CV-01846-LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCaiifomia
`
`U3
`
`-15-
`
`O0‘-~.}O\
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page15 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page15 of 20
`
`Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or Samsung
`Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade
`dress?
`'
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Samsung).)
`
`
`
`E.
`
`
`
`‘Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi)
`axles» _:
`
`Galaxy Tab 10.}
`(4G LTE) (JX 1038)
`
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Ifyou did not answer “Yes” to any of Question 20, please skip to Question 22, and do not answer
`Question 21.
`
`21. If you answered “Yes” to any of Question 20, and thus found that any Samsung entity
`has infringed Apple’s unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade dress, has Apple proven by a
`preponderance of the evidence that the Samsung entity’s infringementwas willful?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N" for “no” (for
`Samsung).)
`
`ea E;
`
`W’
`
`Unregistered iPadfiPad 2
`Trade Dress
`
`-
`
`1
`
`DAMAGES TO APPLE FROM SAMSUNG IF APPLICABLE
`
`22. What is the total dollar amount that Apple is entitled to receive from Samsung on the
`claims on which you have ruled in favor of Apple?
`
`$ .-I/“og.xSl,L«f~8 3:/ere.
`1; / —
`4;,
`?1l?.%?
`
`
`.
`_‘*;/Elf)/1.‘
`
`%,é¢,(,,7/_
`‘V
`“"
`
`-
`Case No.: l 1-CV-0l846—LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`15
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page16 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page16 of 20
`
`23. For the total dollar amount in your answer to Question 22, please provide the dollar
`breakdown by product.
`
`
`
`
`
`1)
`15LCapt1vate (.l
`' Continuum (IX 1016)
`
`
`
`2
`
`-
`
`2 —-'
`
`-1.
`1‘
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`GalaxyS4G (JX1019)
`
`,4
`
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi)(JX1037)
`Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE)(JX1038)
`
`
`
`Cr é 9! 65‘?!
`1
`— g 33. 07$
`
` -
`
`O 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.1 11-CV—01846-Ll-IK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`16
`
`"2:*'z‘?:*t';~~t£"'.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`
`
`00'--JON-Ch!»-il\J
`
`\D
`
`1-1 U1
`
`16
`
`18
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page17 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page17 of 20
`
`SAMSUNG’S UTILITY PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST APPLE
`
`24. For each of the following products, has Samsung proven by a preponderance of the
`evidence that Apple has infringed the indicated Samsung utility patent claims?
`
`(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Samsung), or with an “N” for “no” (for
`Apple). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`13
`
`15
`
`16'
`
`17
`
`18
`
`20
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`(Df"\
`weDO
`
`8u—o
`_r:§><
`F11:
`
`
`
`iPhone3GS (JX1054 andJX
`
`17
`
`
`
`iPodTouch4”‘Gen.(JX1057and JX1077)
`
`Case No.: l I-C\/-01 846—LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page18 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page18 of 20
`
`25. If in response to Question 24 you found that Apple has infringed any Samsung patent(s),
`has Samsung proven by clear and convincing evidence that Apple’s infringement was
`willful?
`
`’5 16 Patent
`Claim 15:
`Claim 16:
`
`’94l Patent
`Claim 10:
`Claim 15:
`
`"711 Patent
`Claim 9:
`
`’893 Patent
`Claim 10:
`
`’460 Patent
`Claim 1:
`
`Yes
`Yes
`
`Yes
`Yes
`
`_
`(for Samsung) No
`(for Samsung) No
`
`(for Apple)
`(for Apple)
`
`(for Samsung) No
`(for Samsung) No
`
`(for Apple)
`(for Apple)
`
`Yes
`
`(for Samsung) No
`
`(for Apple)
`
`Yes
`
`(for Samsung) No
`
`(for Apple)
`
`Yes
`
`(for Samsung) No
`
`_
`(for Apple)
`
`26. Has Apple proven by clear and convincing evidence that Samsung’s asserted utility
`patent claims are invalid?
`
`’5 16 Patent
`Claim 15:
`Claim 16:
`
`’94l Patent
`Claim 10:
`Claim 15:
`
`"711 Patent
`Claim 9:
`
`’893 Patent
`Claim 10:
`
`’460 Patent
`Claim 1:
`
`Yes
`Yes
`
`Yes
`Yes
`
`(for Apple)
`(for Apple)
`
`No
`No
`
`(for Samsung)
`3 4
`3 4 (for Samsung)
`
`(for Apple)
`(for Apple)
`
`No
`No
`
`-
`
`«
`
`-
`
`(for Samsung)
`(for Samsung)
`
`Yes
`
`(for Apple)
`
`No;
`
`3 4
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`Yes
`
`Yes
`
`(for Apple)
`
`No!‘
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`-
`(for Apple)
`
`No
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`Case No.: 11-CV~0l846-LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`18
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`26
`
`27'
`
`28
`
`
`-UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page19 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931' Fi|edO8/24/12 Page19 of 20
`
`DAMAGES TO SAMSUNG FROM APPLE [EF APPLICABLE]
`
`27.
`
`28.
`
`29.
`
`What is the total dollar amount that Samsung is entitled to receive from Apple for
`Samsung’s utility patent infringement claims on the ’516 and ’941 patents?
`
`$ O3
`
`What is the total dollar amount that Samsung is entitled to receive from Apple for
`Samsung’s utility patent infringement claims on the ’711, ’893, and ’460 patents?
`
`$ .
`
`For the total dollar amounts in your answers to Questions 27 and 28, please provide the
`breakdown by product.
`'
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4;
`
`ll
`
`0
`
`.
`
`5 “ lI|'I
`
`iPad 2 3G (JX 1050 and JX1051)
`iPod Touch 4”‘ Gen. (IX 1057 and JX 1077)
`
`
`
`—————
`
`BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIMS AND ANTITRUST
`
`30.
`
`31.
`
`32.
`
`Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung breached its
`contract-ual obligations by failing to timely disclose its intellectual property rights
`(“IPR”) during the creation of the UMTS standard or by failing to "license its “declared
`essential” patents on fair, reasonable, and nomdiscriminatory (“FRAND”) terms?
`
`Yes
`
`(for Apple)
`
`No\/
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung has violated Section '
`2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by monopolizing one or more technology markets related
`to the UMTS standard?
`
`Yes "mW__ (for Apple)
`
`No 3 5
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`If you answered “Yes” to Question 30 or Question 31, what is the dollar amount that
`Apple is entitled to receive from Samsung for Samsung’s antitrust violation and/or
`-breach of contract?
`-
`
`.
`
`Case No.: 11-CV-01846—LHK
`VERDICT FORM
`
`19
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia
`
`‘~DOO"--JON
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`I9
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26'
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`
`Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1931 Filed08/24/12 Page20 of 20
`Case5:11—cv—O1846—LHK Document1931 Fi|edO8/24/12 Page2O of 20
`
`PATENT EXHAUSTION
`
`33. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung is barred by patent
`exhaustion from enforcing the following Samsung patents against Apple?
`
`’S16 Patent
`
`’941 Patent
`
`Yes \/ (for Apple)
`
`Yes 3g (for Apple)
`
`No
`
`No
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`(for Samsung)
`
`
`
`Have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
`
`
`
`PRESIDING JUROR
`
`Case No.: II-CV-01846-LI-{K
`VERDICT FORM
`
`20
`
`00'--JON.U‘:43DJIx)
`
`10
`
`11
`
`13
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`UnitedStatesDistrict
`
`
`
`
`
`CourtFortheNorthernDistrictofCalifornia