1. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page1 of 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9 SAN JOSE DIVISION
10 APPLE, INC., a California corporation, ) Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
)
For the Northern District of California
11 Plaintiff, ) TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM
v. )
United States District Court
12 )
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 )
26
We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them
27 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 22
FINDINGS ON APPLE’S CLAIMS
1
APPLE’S UTILITY AND DESIGN PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST SAMSUNG
2
1. For each of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence
3 that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 19 of the ‘381
4 Patent?
5 (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.)
6
Samsung Samsung Samsung
7 Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
8
Captivate (JX 1011)
9 Continuum (JX 1016)
Droid Charge (JX 1025)
10
Epic 4G (JX 1012)
For the Northern District of California
11 Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)
United States District Court
12 Fascinate (JX 1013)
Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
13 Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
14 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
15 Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
16 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)
17
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)
18 (JX 1037)
Gem (JX 1020)
19 Indulge (JX 1026)
20 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
21 Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
22 Replenish (JX 1024)
Vibrant (JX 1010)
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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 evidence
that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
2 Samsung 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” (for
Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
4
Samsung Samsung Samsung
5 Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
6
Captivate (JX 1011)
7 Continuum (JX 1016)
Droid Charge (JX 1025)
8
Epic 4G (JX 1012)
9 Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)
10 Fascinate (JX 1013)
Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
For the Northern District of California
11 Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
13 Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
14 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
JX 1033 (Galaxy S II (T-Mobile))
15
Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)
16 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)
(JX 1037)
17 Gem (JX 1020)
18 Indulge (JX 1026)
Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
19 Intercept (JX 1009)
20 Mesmerize (JX 1015)
Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
21
Replenish (JX 1024)
22 Transform (JX 1014)
Vibrant (JX 1010)
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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 evidence
that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
2 Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed Claim 50 of the ’163
Patent?
3
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
4 Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
5 Samsung Samsung Samsung
Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
6 Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
7 Captivate (JX 1011)
Continuum (JX 1016)
8 Droid Charge (JX 1025)
9 Epic 4G (JX 1012)
Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)
10
Fascinate (JX 1013)
For the Northern District of California
11 Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
United States District Court
12
Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
13 Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
14
Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
15 JX 1033 (Galaxy S II (T-Mobile))
16 Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)
17 (JX 1037)
Gem (JX 1020)
18
Indulge (JX 1026)
19 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
Intercept (JX 1009)
20
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
21 Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
22 Replenish (JX 1024)
Transform (JX 1014)
23 Vibrant (JX 1010)
24
25
26
27
28
4
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
1 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?
2
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
3 Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
4 ‘381 Patent ‘915 Patent ‘163 Patent
Accused Samsung Product (Claim 19) (Claim 8) (Claim 50)
5
Captivate (JX 1011)
6 Continuum (JX 1016)
Droid Charge (JX 1025)
7
Epic 4G (JX 1012)
8 Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)
Fascinate (JX 1013)
9
Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
10 Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
For the Northern District of California
11 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
13 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
JX 1033 (Galaxy S II (T-Mobile))
14
Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)
15 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE) (JX
1037)
16 Gem (JX 1020)
17 Indulge (JX 1026)
Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
18 Intercept (JX 1009)
19 Mesmerize (JX 1015)
Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
20
Replenish (JX 1024)
21 Transform (JX 1014)
Vibrant (JX 1010)
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
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
1 that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D’677 Patent?
2
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
3 Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
4 Samsung Samsung Samsung
Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
5 Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
6 Fascinate (JX 1013)
Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
7 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
8 Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
9 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
10 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
For the Northern District of California
11
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy S Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
13
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
14 Vibrant (JX 1010)
15
16 6. 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
17 Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D’087 Patent?
18 (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.)
19
Samsung Samsung Samsung
20 Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
21 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
22
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
23 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
24
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
25 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
26 Vibrant (JX 1010)
27
28
6
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
1 that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D’305 Patent?
2
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
3 Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
4 Samsung Samsung Samsung
Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
5 Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
6 Captivate (JX 1011)
Continuum (JX 1016)
7 Droid Charge (JX 1025)
8 Epic 4G (JX 1012)
Fascinate (JX 1013)
9 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
10 Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
Galaxy S Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
For the Northern District of California
11
Gem (JX 1020)
United States District Court
12 Indulge (JX 1026)
Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
13
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
14 Vibrant (JX 1010)
15
16 8. 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
17 Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the D’889 Patent?
18 (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.)
19
Samsung Samsung Samsung
20 Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
21 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE)
(JX 1037)
22
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE) (JX
23 1038)
24
25
26
27
28
7
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 Telecommunications
America (STA) infringed in any of Questions 1 through 8, has Apple proven by a
3 preponderance of the evidence that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), took action that it
knew or should have known would induce SEA or SEC to infringe the D’677, D’087,
4 D’305, and/or D’889 Patents?
5 (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.)
6
D’677 Patent D’087 Patent D’305 Patent D’889
7 Accused Samsung Product Patent
8 Captivate (JX 1011)
Continuum (JX 1016)
9 Droid Charge (JX 1025)
10 Epic 4G (JX 1012)
Fascinate (JX 1013)
For the Northern District of California
11
Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
13 Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX
1031)
14 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX
1032)
15 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX
1033)
16
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch)
17 (JX 1034)
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX
18 1035)
Galaxy S Showcase (i500)
19 (JX 1017)
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and
20 LTE) (JX 1037)
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE)
21 (JX 1038)
22 Gem (JX 1020)
Indulge (JX 1026)
23 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
24 Mesmerize (JX 1015)
Vibrant (JX 1010)
25
26
27
28
8
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

9. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page9 of 22
10. If you answered “Yes” to any of Questions 1 through 9, and thus found that any
1 Samsung entity has infringed any Apple patent(s), has Apple proven by clear and
convincing evidence that the Samsung entity’s infringement was willful?
2
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
3 Samsung).)
4 Samsung Samsung Samsung
Apple Utility and Design Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
5 Patents Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
6 ’381 Patent (Claim 19)
’915 Patent (Claim 8)
7 ’163 Patent (Claim 50)
8 D’677 Patent
D’087 Patent
9 D’305 Patent
10 D’889 Patent
For the Northern District of California
11
United States District Court
12 11. Has Samsung proven by clear and convincing evidence that Apple’s asserted utility
and/or design patent claims are invalid?
13
’381 Patent (Claim 19) Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
14
’915 Patent (Claim 8) Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
15
’163 Patent (Claim 50) Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
16
D’677 Patent Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
17
D’087 Patent Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
18
D’305 Patent Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
19
D’889 Patent Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

10. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page10 of 22
APPLE’S TRADE DRESS CLAIMS AGAINST SAMSUNG
1
Protectability
2
12. Has Samsung proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple’s registered iPhone
3 trade dress ’983 is not protectable?
4 Yes (not protectable – for Samsung) _____ No (protectable – for Apple) _________
5
13. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple’s unregistered trade
6 dresses are protectable?
7 (Please answer with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for Samsung).)
8
Apple Trade Dresses Protectable
9 Unregistered iPhone 3 Trade Dress
Unregistered Combination iPhone Trade Dress
10
Unregistered iPad/iPad 2 Trade Dress
For the Northern District of California
11
United States District Court
12
Trade Dress Dilution
13
14. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Apple’s trade dresses are
14 famous?
15 (Please answer with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for Samsung).)
16
Apple Trade Dresses Famous
17 Registered iPhone Trade Dress
18 Unregistered iPhone 3 Trade Dress
Unregistered Combination iPhone Trade Dress
19 Unregistered iPad/iPad 2 Trade Dress
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

11. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page11 of 22
If you did not find the registered iPhone trade dress protectable and famous, please skip to
1 Question 16, and do not answer Question 15.
2 15. If you found the registered iPhone trade dress protectable and famous, for each of the
following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung
3 Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or Samsung
Telecommunications America (STA) has diluted the registered iPhone trade dress?
4
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
5 Samsung).)
6 Samsung Samsung Samsung
Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
7 Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
8 Captivate (JX 1011)
Continuum (JX 1016)
9 Droid Charge (JX 1025)
10 Epic 4G (JX 1012)
Fascinate (JX 1013)
For the Northern District of California
11
Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
13
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
14 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
15 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
16
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
17 Galaxy S II Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
18 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
19 Vibrant (JX 1010)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
11
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

12. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page12 of 22
If you did not find the unregistered iPhone 3 trade dress protectable and famous, please skip to
1 Question 17, and do not answer Question 16.
2 16. If you found the unregistered iPhone 3 trade dress protectable and famous, for each of
the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
3 Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or Samsung
Telecommunications America (STA) has diluted the unregistered iPhone 3 trade dress?
4
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
5 Samsung).)
6 Samsung Samsung Samsung
Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
7 Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
8 Captivate (JX 1011)
Continuum (JX 1016)
9 Droid Charge (JX 1025)
10 Epic 4G (JX 1012)
Fascinate (JX 1013)
For the Northern District of California
11
Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
13
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
14 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
15 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
16
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
17 Galaxy S II Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
18 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
19 Vibrant (JX 1010)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

13. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page13 of 22
If you did not find the unregistered Combination iPhone trade dress protectable and famous,
1 please skip to Question 18, and do not answer Question 17.
2 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
3 that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or
Samsung Telecommunications America (STA) has diluted the unregistered Combination
4 iPhone trade dress?
5 (Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
Samsung).)
6
Samsung Samsung Samsung
7 Accused Samsung Product Electronics Electronics Telecommunications
Co., Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
8
Captivate (JX 1011)
9 Continuum (JX 1016)
Droid Charge (JX 1025)
10
Epic 4G (JX 1012)
For the Northern District of California
11 Fascinate (JX 1013)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
13 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
14 Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
15
Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
16 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
17 Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
18 Galaxy S II Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
19 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
Mesmerize (JX 1015)
20
Vibrant (JX 1010)
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

14. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page14 of 22
If you did not find the unregistered iPad/iPad2 trade dress protectable and famous, please skip to
1 Question 19, and do not answer Question 18.
2 18. If you found the unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade dress protectable and famous, for each
of the following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
3 Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or Samsung
Telecommunications America (STA) has diluted the unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade
4 dress?
5 (Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
Samsung).)
6
Samsung Samsung Samsung
7 Accused Samsung Electronics Co., Electronics Telecommunications
Product Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
8
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi
9 and LTE) (JX 1037)
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G
10 LTE) (JX 1038)
For the Northern District of California
11
United States District Court
12
If you did not answer “Yes” to any of Questions 15 through 18, please skip to Question 21, and
13 do not answer Questions 19 and 20.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

15. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page15 of 22
19. If you found that Samsung Electronics America (SEA) or Samsung Telecommunications
1 America (STA) infringed in any of Questions 15 through 18, for each of the following
products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung
2 Electronics Co. (SEC) took action that it knew or should have known would induce SEA
or STA to dilute any of the Apple trade dresses?
3
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
4 Samsung). Do not provide an answer for any cell that is blacked out.)
5 Registered Unregistered Unregistered Unregistered
Accused Samsung iPhone iPhone 3 Combination iPad/iPad 2
6 Product Trade Dress Trade Dress iPhone Trade Dress
Trade Dress
7
Captivate (JX 1011)
8
Continuum (JX 1016)
9
Droid Charge (JX
10 1025)
Epic 4G (JX 1012)
For the Northern District of California
11
Fascinate (JX 1013)
United States District Court
12
Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
13
Galaxy Prevail (JX
14 1022)
Galaxy S (i9000) (JX
15 1007)
16 Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
Galaxy S II (AT&T)
17 (JX 1031)
18 Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX
1032)
19 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile)
(JX 1033)
20 Galaxy S II (Epic 4G
Touch) (JX 1034)
21 Galaxy S II
(Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
22
Galaxy S II Showcase
23 (i500) (JX 1017)
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi
24 and LTE) (JX 1037)
25 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G
LTE) (JX 1038)
26
Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
27 Mesmerize (JX 1015)
28
15
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

16. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page16 of 22
1 Vibrant (JX 1010)
2 20. 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 clear and
3 convincing evidence that the Samsung entity’s dilution was willful?
4 (Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
Samsung).)
5
Samsung Samsung Samsung
6 Asserted Trade Dress Electronics Co., Electronics Telecommunications
Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
7
Registered iPhone Trade
8 Dress
Unregistered iPhone 3
9 Trade Dress
10 Unregistered Combination
iPhone Trade Dress
For the Northern District of California
11 Unregistered iPad/iPad 2
Trade Dress
United States District Court
12
13
14 Trade Dress Infringement
15
If you did not find the unregistered iPad/iPad2 trade dress protectable, please skip to Question
16 24, and do not answer Questions 21 through 23.
17 21. If you found the unregistered iPad/iPad2 trade dress protectable, for each of the
following products, has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung
18 Electronics Co. (SEC), Samsung Electronics America (SEA), and/or Samsung
Telecommunications America (STA) has infringed the unregistered iPad/iPad2 trade
19 dress?
20 (Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
Samsung).)
21
Samsung Samsung Samsung
22 Asserted Trade Dress Electronics Co., Electronics Telecommunications
Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
23 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi
and LTE) (JX 1037)
24 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G
LTE) (JX 1038)
25
26
If you did not answer “Yes” to any of Question 21, please skip to Question 24, and do not answer
27 Questions 22 and 23.
28
16
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

17. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page17 of 22
22. If you found that Samsung Electronics America (SEA) or Samsung Telecommunications
1 America (STA) infringed in any of Question 21, for each of the following products, has
Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung Electronics Co. (SEC)
2 took action that it knew or should have known would induce SEA or STA to infringe
Apple’s unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade dress?
3
(Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
4 Samsung).)
5 Unregistered
Accused Samsung Product iPad/iPad 2 Trade
6 Dress
7 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE) (JX 1037)
8 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE) (JX 1038)
9
If you did not answer “Yes” to any of Question 21 and 22, please skip to Question 24, and do not
10 answer Question 23.
For the Northern District of California
11 23. If you answered “Yes” to any of Questions 21-22, and thus found that any Samsung
entity has infringed Apple’s unregistered iPad/iPad 2 trade dress, has Apple proven by
United States District Court
12 clear and convincing evidence that the Samsung entity’s infringement was willful?
13 (Please answer in each cell with a “Y” for “yes” (for Apple), or with an “N” for “no” (for
Samsung).)
14
Samsung Samsung Samsung
15 Asserted Trade Dress Electronics Co., Electronics Telecommunications
Ltd. America, Inc. America, LLC
16
Unregistered iPad/iPad 2
17 Trade Dress
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

18. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page18 of 22
DAMAGES TO APPLE FROM SAMSUNG (IF APPLICABLE)
1
2 24. 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?
3
$______________________________________.
4
5
25. For the total dollar amount in your answer to Question 24, please provide the dollar
6 breakdown by product.
7 Accused Samsung Product Amount
Captivate (JX 1011)
8
Continuum (JX 1016)
9 Droid Charge (JX 1025)
10 Epic 4G (JX 1012)
Exhibit 4G (JX 1028)
For the Northern District of California
11 Fascinate (JX 1013)
United States District Court
12 Galaxy Ace (JX 1030)
Galaxy Prevail (JX 1022)
13 Galaxy S (i9000) (JX 1007)
14 Galaxy S 4G (JX 1019)
Galaxy S II (AT&T) (JX 1031)
15
Galaxy S II (i9100) (JX 1032)
16 Galaxy S II (T-Mobile) (JX 1033)
17 Galaxy S II (Epic 4G Touch) (JX 1034)
Galaxy S II (Skyrocket) (JX 1035)
18
Galaxy S Showcase (i500) (JX 1017)
19 Galaxy Tab (JX 1036)
20 Galaxy Tab 10.1 (WiFi and LTE) (JX 1037)
Galaxy Tab 10.1 (4G LTE) (JX 1038)
21
Gem (JX 1020)
22 Indulge (JX 1026)
23 Infuse 4G (JX 1027)
Intercept (JX 1009)
24 Mesmerize (JX 1015)
25 Nexus S 4G (JX 1023)
Replenish (JX 1024)
26 Transform (JX 1014)
27 Vibrant (JX 1010)
28
18
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

19. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page19 of 22
SAMSUNG’S UTILITY PATENT CLAIMS AGAINST APPLE
1
26. For each of the following products, has Samsung proven by a preponderance of the
2 evidence that Apple infringed the indicated Samsung utility patent claims?
3 (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. )
4
Patent
5
Claim
‘460
1
6
7
Patent
Claim
‘893
8 10
9
Patent
Claim
‘711
9
10
For the Northern District of California
11
Claim
United States District Court
15
‘941 Patent
12
13
Claim
10
14
15
Claim
16
16
‘516 Patent
17
Claim
18
15
19
(JX1055 and
1057 and JX
4th Gen. (JX
iPhone 3GS
iPod Touch
20
iPhone 3G
(JX 1053)
iPad2 3G
JX 1056)
(JX 1054
(JX 1050
Accused
iPhone 4
Product
and JX
and JX
Apple
1076)
1051)
1077)
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

20. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page20 of 22
1 27. If in response to Question No. 26 you found that Apple has infringed any Samsung
patent(s), has Samsung proven by clear and convincing evidence that Apple’s
2 infringement was willful?
3
‘516 Patent
4 Claim 15: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
Claim 16: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
5
‘914 Patent
6 Claim 10: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
Claim 15: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
7
8 ‘711 Patent
Claim 9: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
9
‘893 Patent
10 Claim 10: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
For the Northern District of California
11
‘460 Patent
United States District Court
12 Claim 1: Yes ______ (for Samsung) No ______ (for Apple)
13
28. Has Apple proven by clear and convincing evidence that Samsung’s asserted utility
14 patent claims are invalid?
15 ‘516 Patent
16 Claim 15: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
Claim 16: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
17
‘914 Patent
18 Claim 10: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
Claim 15: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
19
20 ‘711 Patent
Claim 9: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
21
‘893 Patent
22 Claim 10: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
23
‘460 Patent
24 Claim 1: Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
25
26
27
28
20
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

21. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page21 of 22
DAMAGES TO SAMSUNG FROM APPLE (IF APPLICABLE)
1
29. What is the total dollar amount that Samsung is entitled to receive from Apple for
2 Apple’s utility patent infringement claims on the ‘516 and ‘941 patents?
3
$______________________________________.
4
5 30. What is the total dollar amount that Samsung is entitled to receive from Apple for
Apple’s utility patent infringement claims on the ‘711, ‘893, and ‘460 patents?
6
$______________________________________.
7
8
31. For the total dollar amounts in your answers to Question Nos. 29 and 30, please provide
9 the breakdown by product.
10 Accused Samsung Product Amount
iPhone 3G (JX 1053)
For the Northern District of California
11 iPhone 3GS (JX 1054 and JX 1076)
United States District Court
12 iPhone 4 (JX1055 and JX 1056)
iPad2 3G (JX 1050 and JX 1051)
13 iPod Touch 4th Gen. (JX 1057 and JX 1077)
14
15 BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIMS AND ANTITRUST
16 32. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung breached its
contractual obligations by failing to timely disclose its intellectual property rights
17 (“IPR”) during the creation of the UMTS standard or by failing to license its “declared
essential” patents on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms?
18
Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
19
20
33. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung has violated Section
21 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by monopolizing one or more technology markets related
to the UMTS standard?
22
Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
23
24 34. If you answered “Yes” to Question No. 32 or Question No. 33, what is the dollar amount
that Apple is entitled to receive from Samsung for Samsung’s antitrust violation and/or
25 breach of contract?
26 $______________________________________.
27
28
21
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM

22. Case5:11-cv-01846-LHK Document1870 Filed08/20/12 Page22 of 22
PATENT EXHAUSTION
1
35. Has Apple proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Samsung is barred by patent
2 exhaustion from enforcing the following Samsung patents against Apple?
3 ’516 Patent Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
4
’914 Patent Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
5
6 WAIVER
7 36. Has Apple proven by clear and convincing evidence that Samsung has waived its rights
to enforce the following Samsung patents against Apple?
8
’516 Patent Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
9
’914 Patent Yes ______ (for Apple) No ______ (for Samsung)
10
For the Northern District of California
11
United States District Court
12
Have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
13
14 Signed:_____________________________________ Date:_______________________________
15 PRESIDING JUROR
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
22
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
TENTATIVE VERDICT FORM