Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 1 of 26
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
` 
`
`Exhibit 4
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 2 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`
`POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.,
`a Delaware corporation,
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Case No. 09-cv-05235- MMC
`
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR
`INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware
`corporation, FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR
`CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, and
`FAIRCHILD (TAIWAN) CORPORATION,
`a Taiwanese corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 3 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
`1.1
`DUTY OF JURY
`Members of the Jury: Now that you have heard all of the evidence and the arguments of
`
`the attorneys, it is my duty to instruct you as to the law of the case. A copy of these instructions
`
`will be sent with you to the jury room when you deliberate. You will also have a verdict form,
`
`which will list the questions that you must answer to decide this case.
`
`You must not infer from these instructions or from anything I may say or do as indicating
`
`that I have an opinion regarding the evidence or what your verdict should be.
`
`It is your duty to find the facts from all the evidence in the case. To those facts you will
`
`apply the law as I give it to you. You must follow the law as I give it to you whether you agree
`
`with it or not. And you must not be influenced by any personal likes or dislikes, opinions,
`
`prejudices, or sympathy. That means that you must decide the case solely on the evidence before
`
`you. You will recall that you took an oath to do so.
`
`In following my instructions, you must follow all of them and not single out some and
`
`ignore others; they are all important.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 4 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.2
`BURDENS OF PROOF
`This is a civil case in which Power Integrations is the owner of two patents which it has
`
`already been determined that Fairchild infringes. A party whose patents have been infringed is
`
`entitled to money damages. The factual issues you will decide must be proven by what we refer
`
`to as a “preponderance of the evidence.” That means Power Integrations has to produce
`
`evidence that, when considered in light of all of the facts, leads you to believe that what Power
`
`Integrations claims is more likely true than not. To put it differently, if you were to put the
`
`parties’ evidence on opposite sides of a scale, the evidence supporting the claims of Power
`
`Integrations must make the scales tip somewhat to its side.
`
`Some of you may have heard the phrase “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” That burden
`
`of proof applies only in criminal cases and has nothing to do with a civil case like this one. You
`
`should therefore not consider it in this case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 5 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.3 WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE
`I want to remind you once again what is, and what is not, evidence that you must use to
`
`decide the facts of this case. The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are
`
`consists of:
`
`1.
`
`The sworn testimony of witnesses, on both direct and cross-examination,
`
`regardless of who called the witness;
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`The exhibits that have been admitted into evidence; and
`
`Any facts to which all the parties have agreed.
`
`In reaching your verdict, you must consider only the testimony and exhibits admitted into
`
`evidence. Certain things are not evidence, and you may not consider them in deciding what the
`
`facts are. I will list them for you:
`
`1.
`
`Arguments and statements by lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers are not
`
`witnesses. What they have said in their opening statements, closing arguments, and at other
`
`times is intended to help you interpret the evidence, but it is not evidence. If the facts as you
`
`remember them differ from the way the lawyers have stated them, your memory of them
`
`controls.
`
`2.
`
`Questions and objections by lawyers are not evidence. Attorneys have a duty to
`
`their clients to object when they believe a question is improper under the rules of evidence. You
`
`should not be influenced by the objection or by the Court’s ruling on it.
`
`3.
`
`Testimony that has been excluded or stricken, or that you have been instructed to
`
`disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition some testimony and exhibits
`
`have been admitted only for a limited purpose; where I have given a limiting instruction, you
`
`must follow it.
`
`4.
`
`Anything you have seen or heard when the Court was not in session is not
`
`evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received at trial.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 6 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.4
`DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
`Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such
`
`as testimony by a witness about what the witness personally saw, heard, or did. Circumstantial
`
`evidence is proof of one or more facts from which you could find another fact.
`
`By way of example, if you wake up in the morning and see that the sidewalk is wet, you
`
`may find from that fact that it rained during the night. However, other evidence, such as a turned
`
`on garden hose, may provide a different explanation for the presence of water on the sidewalk.
`
`Therefore, before you decide that a fact has been proved by circumstantial evidence, you must
`
`consider all the evidence in light of reason, experience, and common sense.
`
`You should consider both direct and circumstantial evidence. The law makes no
`
`distinction between the weight that you should give to either direct or circumstantial evidence. It
`
`is for you to decide how much weight to give to any evidence.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 7 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.5
`CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE
`You should use your common sense in weighing the evidence. Consider it in light of
`
`your everyday experience with people and events, and give it whatever weight you believe it
`
`deserves. If your experience tells you that certain evidence reasonably leads to a conclusion, you
`
`are free to reach that conclusion.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 8 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.6
`CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES
`In determining the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to believe
`
`and which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness says, or part of it, or
`
`none of it.
`
`In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:
`
`(1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the things testified to;
`
`(2) the witness’s memory;
`
`(3) the witness’s manner while testifying;
`
`(4) the witness’s interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or prejudice;
`
`(5) whether other evidence contradicted the witness’s testimony;
`
`(6) the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the evidence; and
`
`(7) any other factors that bear on believability.
`
`You should remember that a simple mistake by a witness does not necessarily mean that
`
`the witness was not telling the truth. People may tend to forget some things or remember other
`
`things inaccurately. If a witness has made a misstatement, you must consider whether it was
`
`simply an innocent lapse of memory or an intentional falsehood, and that may depend upon
`
`whether it concerns an important fact or an unimportant detail.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 9 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.7
`NUMBER OF WITNESSES
`One more point about the witnesses. Sometimes jurors wonder if the number of
`
`witnesses who testified makes any difference.
`
`Do not make any decisions based only on the number of witnesses who testified. The
`
`proof of a fact or the weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the
`
`number of witnesses who testify about it. What is more important is how believable the
`
`witnesses were, and how much weight you think their testimony deserves. Concentrate on that,
`
`not the numbers.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 10 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.8
`EXPERT OPINION
`When knowledge of technical subject matter may be helpful to the jury, a person who has
`
`special training, education, or experience in that technical field – a person called an expert
`
`witness – is permitted to state an opinion on those technical matters.
`
`You are not required, however, to accept that opinion. Expert testimony should receive
`
`whatever weight and credit you think appropriate, given all the other evidence in the case.
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 11 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.9
`DEPOSITION IN LIEU OF LIVE TESTIMONY
`A deposition is the sworn testimony of a witness taken before trial. The witness is placed
`
`under oath to tell the truth, and lawyers for each party may ask questions. The questions and
`
`answers are recorded. The deposition of a person can be used at trial under certain
`
`circumstances, for example, when a person is unavailable to testify at trial.
`
`You should consider deposition testimony, presented to you in court in lieu of live
`
`testimony, insofar as possible, in the same way as if the witness had been present to testify.
`
`If deposition testimony is read to you by the attorneys, do not place any significance on
`
`the behavior or tone of voice of the person reading the questions or answers.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 12 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.10 CHARTS AND SUMMARIES RECEIVED AND NOT RECEIVED IN
`EVIDENCE
`During the course of the trial, certain charts and summaries may have been received into
`
`evidence to illustrate information brought out in the trial. Charts and summaries are only as
`
`good as the underlying evidence deserves. You will have these admitted exhibits in the jury
`
`room for your deliberations.
`
`Other exhibits (including charts and summaries) were offered to help illustrate the
`
`testimony of the various witnesses. These illustrative exhibits, called “demonstrative exhibits,”
`
`have not been admitted, are not evidence, and should not be considered as evidence. They are
`
`not themselves evidence or proof of any facts. Rather, it is the underlying testimony of the
`
`witness that you heard when you saw the demonstrative exhibits that is the evidence in this case.
`
`You will not have these demonstrative exhibits in the jury room for your deliberation.
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 13 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.11 USE OF NOTES
`You may use notes taken during trial to assist your memory. However, you should use
`
`caution in consulting your notes. There is always a tendency to attach undue importance to
`
`matters that you have written down. Some testimony that is considered unimportant at the time
`
`presented, and thus not written down, takes on greater importance later on in the trial in light of
`
`all the evidence presented. Therefore, you are instructed that your notes are only a tool to aid
`
`your own individual memory, and you should not compare notes with other jurors in determining
`
`the content of any testimony or in evaluating the importance of any evidence. Your notes are not
`
`evidence, and are by no means a complete outline of the proceedings or a list of the highlights of
`
`the trial. Above all, your memory should be the greatest asset when it comes time to deliberate
`
`and render a decision in this case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 14 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`DAMAGES GENERALLY
`I will now instruct you about the measure of damages. You must decide, according to the
`
`instructions I give you, the appropriate amount of money damages to compensate Power
`
`Integrations for Fairchild’s infringement.
`
`The amount of money damages must be adequate to compensate Power Integrations for the
`
`infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial
`
`position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the
`
`damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you
`
`award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer. A patent holder
`
`has the burden to persuade you of the amount of its damages. You should award only those
`
`damages that the patent holder more likely than not suffered. While the patent holder is not
`
`required to prove its damages with mathematical precision, it must prove them with reasonable
`
`certainty. A patent holder is not entitled to damages that are remote or speculative.
`
`Mere difficulty in ascertaining damages is not fatal to the patent owner. You may base your
`
`evaluation of reasonable certainty on opinion evidence. Any doubts regarding the computation of
`
`the amount of damages should be resolved against the infringer and in favor of the patentee.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 15 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.1
`REASONABLE ROYALTY
`Power Integrations is seeking money damages for past infringement in the amount of a
`
`reasonable royalty.
`
`A royalty is a payment made to a patent holder in exchange for the right to make, use or
`
`sell the claimed invention. This right is called a “license.” A reasonable royalty is the payment
`
`for the license that would have resulted from a hypothetical negotiation between the patent
`
`holder and the infringer taking place at the time when the infringing activity first began. In
`
`considering the nature of this negotiation, you must assume that the patent holder and the
`
`infringer would have acted reasonably and would have entered into a license agreement. You
`
`must also assume that both parties believed the patent was valid and infringed. Your role is to
`
`determine what the result of the hypothetical negotiation would have been. The test for damages
`
`is what royalty would have resulted from the hypothetical negotiation and not simply what either
`
`party would have preferred.
`
`Where an infringing product has features that are covered by the patent-in-suit and
`
`features that are not covered by the patent-in-suit, there are two alternative reasonable royalty
`
`damages theories, apportionment and entire market value rule.
`
`Under the entire market value rule, a plaintiff may be awarded damages attributable to an
`
`entire multi-feature product where the plaintiff establishes that the patented feature creates the
`
`basis for customer demand for that product. It is not enough to show that the patented feature is
`
`viewed as valuable, important, or essential to the entire product.
`
`Under the apportionment of damages rule, the ultimate damages must reflect the value
`
`attributable to the infringing features of the product, and no more. Measuring this value requires
`
`you to identify and award only the value of the patented features.
`
`If it is not established that the patented feature creates the basis for customer demand for
`
`the product, you must apportion the royalty down to a reasonable estimate of the value of the
`
`patented feature.
`
`
`
`14
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 16 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`It is up to you, based on the evidence, to decide what type of royalty is appropriate in this
`
`case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`15
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 17 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.2
`FACTORS FOR DETERMINING REASONABLE ROYALTY
`In determining a reasonable royalty, you should consider all the facts known and
`
`available to the parties at the time the infringement began. Some of the kinds of factors that you
`
`may consider in making your determination are:
`
`1.
`
`The royalties received by the patent owner for the licensing of the patent in
`
`suit, proving or tending to prove an established royalty.
`
`2.
`
`The rates paid by the licensee for the use of other patents comparable to the
`
`patent in suit.
`
`3.
`
`The nature and the scope of the license, as exclusive or non-exclusive; or
`
`as restricted or non-restricted in terms of territory or with respect to
`
`whom the manufactured product may be sold.
`
`4.
`
`The licensor’s established policy and marketing program to maintain its patent
`
`exclusivity by not licensing others to use the invention or by granting licenses
`
`under special conditions designed to preserve that exclusivity.
`
`5.
`
`The commercial relationship between the licensor and the licensee, such as,
`
`whether they are competitors in the same territory in the same line of business;
`
`or whether they are inventor and promoter.
`
`6.
`
`The effect of selling the patented product in promoting sales of other products of
`
`the licensee; the existing value of the invention to the licensor as a generator of
`
`sales of his non-patented items; and the extent of such derivative or convoyed
`
`sales.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`The duration of the patent and the term of the license.
`
`The established profitability of the products made under the patents-in-suit; their
`
`commercial success; and their current popularity.
`
`9.
`
`The utility and advantages of the patent property over the old modes or devices, if
`
`any, that had been used for achieving similar results.
`16
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 18 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10.
`
`The nature of the patented invention; the character of the commercial embodiment
`
`of it as owned and produced by the licensor; and the benefits to those who have
`
`used the invention.
`
`11.
`
`The extent to which the infringer has made use of the invention, and any evidence
`
`probative of the value of that use.
`
`12.
`
`The portion of the profit or of the selling price that may be customary in the
`
`particular business or in comparable businesses to allow for the use of the
`
`invention or analogous inventions.
`
`13.
`
`The portion of the realizable profit that should be credited to the inventions as
`
`distinguished from non-patented elements, the manufacturing process, business
`
`risks, or significant features or improvements added by the infringer.
`
`14.
`
`15.
`
`The opinion and testimony of qualified experts.
`
`The amount that a licensor (such as the patent owner) and a licensee (such as the
`
`infringer) would have agreed upon (at the time the infringement began) if both
`
`had been reasonably and voluntarily trying to reach an agreement; that is, the
`
`amount which a prudent licensee – who desired, as a business proposition, to
`
`obtain a license to manufacture and sell a particular article embodying the
`
`patented invention – would have been willing to pay as a royalty and yet be able
`
`to make a reasonable profit and which amount would have been acceptable by a
`
`prudent patentee who was willing to grant a license.
`
`16.
`
`Any other economic factor that a normally prudent businessperson would, under
`
`similar circumstances, take into consideration in negotiating the hypothetical
`
`license.
`
`No one factor is dispositive and you can and should consider the evidence that has been
`
`presented to you on each of these factors. The fifteenth factor establishes the framework which
`
`
`
`17
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 19 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`you should use in determining a reasonable royalty, that is, the payment that would have resulted
`
`from a negotiation between the patent holder and the infringer taking place at a time prior to
`
`when the infringement began.
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 20 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT DAMAGES: NON-INFRINGING ALTERNATIVES
`
`2.3
`One of the factors that can be considered during a reasonable royalty hypothetical
`
`negotiation is the availability of acceptable non-infringing alternatives to the patented
`
`technology. Not all alternatives are acceptable non-infringing alternatives. To be an acceptable
`
`non-infringing alternative, the alternative must have been acceptable to both the party and its
`
`customers. Also, the alternative must have been available to the party, meaning the party must
`
`have had the capability of implementing the alternative. However, an acceptable non-infringing
`
`alternative need not have actually been produced, marketed, or sold during the period of
`
`infringement, so long as it was available to the party. To determine whether there were
`
`acceptable non-infringing alternatives, you may consider the following:
`
`(1) Whether the alternative was available around the time of the hypothetical negotiation;
`
`(2) Whether the effects of using the alternative were known in the industry;
`
`(3) Whether the alternative would have had the advantages of the patented invention;
`
`(4) Whether customers would have accepted the alternative;
`
`(5) Whether the party had the necessary equipment, know-how, and experience to implement
`the alternative; and
`
`(6) The time and cost to the party of implementing the alternative.
`
`
`19
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 21 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT DAMAGES: NO DAMAGES FOR FOREIGN SALES
`
`2.4
`U.S. patent law does not operate outside the United States. Patent infringement damages
`
`compensate only for the consequences of domestic activity. Thus, you may not award damages
`
`based on the sale of products that were not imported into the United States.
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 22 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.5
`INFRINGER’S PROFIT
`While an infringer’s profit expectation is a factor to consider in the overall reasonable
`
`royalty analysis, it is not an absolute limit to the amount of the reasonable royalty that may be
`
`awarded based upon a reasoned hypothetical negotiation.
`
`
`
`
`
`21
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 23 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.6
`
`INFRINGER’S MENTAL STATE
`
`During Fairchild’s opening statement, you may have heard counsel for Fairchild state that
`
`Fairchild had reasons for believing that it did not infringe and that the patents were invalid.
`
`Fairchild’s state of mind is not at issue; you should disregard any such statement.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`22
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 24 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`DELIBERATION AND VERDICT
`3.1
`DUTY TO DELIBERATE
`When you begin your deliberations, you should elect one member of the jury as your
`
`foreperson. That person will preside over the deliberations and speak for you here in Court.
`
`You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement if you can do
`
`so. Your verdict must be unanimous.
`
`Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only after you have
`
`considered all of the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and listened to the views
`
`of your fellow jurors.
`
`Do not hesitate to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that you should.
`
`Do not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.
`
`It is important that you attempt to reach unanimous verdict, but of course, only if each of
`
`you can do so after having made your own conscientious decision. Do not change an honest
`
`belief about the weight and effect of the evidence simply to reach a verdict.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`23
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 25 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.2
`COMMUNICATION WITH THE COURT
`If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me, you may send
`
`a note, signed by your foreperson or by one or more members of the jury. No member of the
`
`jury should ever attempt to communicate with me except by a signed writing; I will
`
`communicate with any member of the jury on anything concerning the case only in writing, or
`
`here in open court.
`
`If you send out a question, I may have to talk to the lawyers about what you have asked,
`
`so it may take some time to get back to you. You may continue your deliberations while waiting
`
`for the answer to any question.
`
`Remember that you are not to tell anyone – including me – how the jury stands,
`
`numerically or otherwise, until after you have reached a unanimous verdict or have been
`
`discharged. Do not disclose any vote count in any note to the Court.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`24
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 275-4 Filed 11/27/18 Page 26 of 26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.3
`RETURN OF VERDICT
`A verdict form has been prepared for you. You will take this form to the jury room and
`
`when you have reached unanimous agreement as to your verdict, you will have your foreperson
`
`fill in, date and sign the form. You will then advise the Court that you are ready to return to the
`
`courtroom.
`
`
`
`
`25
`
`FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`CASE NO. C 09-5235 MMC
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`