Smartphone war hits front page in the US
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Smartphone war hits front page in the US

Case of the Year: Apple v Samsung


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.


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 ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A team of lawyers who joined Norton Rose Fulbright from Polsinelli say they were drawn to the firm's global platform
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Lawyers say a ruling concerning liability for trademark infringement could give company directors an easy way out and create litigation uncertainty
The LMG Life Sciences Awards announces the winners for the 5th annual awards
Some US lawyers have strengthened their connections with European firms as they help clients determine whether the UPC will become a 'centre of gravity'
In the latest episode, the team discusses the battle to take control of listed company and IP business Qantm IP, and looks at some recent hiring trends
To mark Mental Health Awareness Week, lawyers explain how they manage their mental health, and how they pluck up the courage to ask themselves difficult questions
IP lawyers unpick a case heard at the CJEU’s Grand Chamber this week that could potentially create a new world for litigation in Europe
A lawyer who replied to a cease-and-desist letter with just two words has shown others how to deal with vexatious infringement allegations
The suggested rule change surrounding terminal disclaimers could ease the burden on defendants, but risks complicating prosecution strategies
Gift this article