Smartphone war hits front page in the US

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Smartphone war hits front page in the US

Case of the Year: Apple v Samsung

velvin.jpg

The result

Apple awarded $1 billion in damages in US jury trial

The impact

Spotlight cast on design patents and juries

The startling award in August of $1.05 billion to Apple for infringement by three patents and three design patents by Samsung sparked debate on two issues – one deserved, the other less so.

The debate over design patents ignored a fundamental aspect of the case: of all the patents that were found to have been infringed, the only one that was not was the famous D504889 tablet design – the "rectangle with rounded corners" in the words of a Samsung statement. Three others were infringed though, and it was the biggest ever damages award in a US design case.

sketch.jpg

The second debate, on the importance of juries, was more justified. This was the biggest patent jury case for years, with post-case interviews by foreman Velvin Hogan adding to the focus on those nine men and women.

In his interviews Hogan revealed that the jury was most swayed by discovery documents containing minutes of a Samsung meeting in Korea, which included comments from Google executives expressing discomfort about the similarity of the products to Apple's. In another document, a Samsung VP said the products weren't close enough to Apple's. "You need to move closer," said the VP according to Velvin, who added: "They did move closer, but in moving closer, they crossed the line."

It is perhaps understandable that, faced with technical products and an unsettled area of law, the jury focused on such smoking gun statements. In fact, jury consultant Ronald Beaton of Trial Graphix had predicted to Managing IP in advance of the case that it would play out this way. "Even with a smart jury, cases are sold to juries like houses ‑ on memorable features that stick with you. It's going to come down to emails and documents that clue us in to what Samsung was thinking when designing these devices," he said.

The size of the damages award took most people by surprise, and demonstrated the unpredictability of jury awards in such cases. Although substantially less than the $2.7 billion claimed by Apple, this will be the largest ever patent award if it survives appeal at the Federal Circuit.

While waiting for the appeal, Apple has asked for injunctions against sales of several Samsung products and a further $707 million in damages, following the finding by Judge Lucy Koh that Samsung's infringement was willful. Samsung has asked for a new trial.

Case details Designs

Apple v Samsung

Patents and design patents: tablet design, and patents for scrolling and scaling text on a touch screen

Patent office: United States

Patent numbers: 7469381, 7844915, 7864163

Design numbers: 504889, 593087, 618677, 604305

Design/patent holder: Apple

Other party: Samsung

Court: District Court for the Northern District of California

Case numbers: C 11-1846 and C 12-0630

For Apple: Morrison & Foerster (Harold McElhinny)

For Samsung: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan


This case was selected as one of Managing IP’s Cases of the Year for 2012.

To see the rest, click on one of the cases below.

The 10 cases of the year

A fillip for the EU pharmaceutical sector

Relief for trade mark owners in red sole saga

Australian TV streaming service held to be illegal

Smartphone war hits front page in the US

Liberalising the EU’s software market

India allows parallel imports

Victory for fair dealing in Canada

Lacoste loses its trade mark in China

Google prevails in Android attack

EU test case clarifies class headings

Ten you might have missed

Canada: Ambiguous claims can invalidate patents

Russia: Certainty on parallel imports

Italy: TV formats win copyright for the first time

First FRAND cases litigated worldwide

Monsanto loses in Brazil

Data exclusivity backed by Mexican courts

China: A shift over OEM manufacturing

Authors in the US able to reclaim joint copyrights

Germany: Knitted trainers a sign of the future

India: Financial Times loses trade mark

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

As Marshall Gerstein celebrates its 70-year anniversary, Jeffrey Sharp, managing partner, reflects on lessons that shaped both his career and the firm’s success
News of two pharma deals involving Novo Nordisk and GSK and a loss for Open AI were also among the top talking points
Howard Hogan, IP partner at Gibson Dunn, says AI deepfakes are driving lawyers to rethink how IP protects creativity and innovation
Vivien Chan joins us for our ‘Women in IP’ series to discuss gender bias in the legal profession and why the business model followed by law firms leaves little room for women leaders
Partner Jeremy Hertzog explains how his team worked through a huge amount of disclosure from Adidas and what victory means for the firm
Evarist Kameja and Hadija Juma at Bowmans explain why a new law in Tanzania marks a significant shift in IP enforcement
In the wake of controversy surrounding Banksy’s recent London mural, AJ Park’s Thomas Huthwaite and Eloise Calder delve into the challenges street artists face in protecting their works and rights
Alex Levkin, founder of IPNote, discusses reshaping the filing industry through legal tech, and why practitioners’ advice should stretch beyond immediate legal needs
Cohausz & Florack, together with Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben, has taken action against Amazon on behalf of three VIA LA licensors
In the fourth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss unconscious bias in the IP workplace and how to address it
Gift this article