`IBG ET AL. v. TRADING TECH
`CBM2015-00182
`
`Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIJ%dge Sh
`EASTERN DIVISION
`United aron Johnson Coleman
`
`Mm? 1 8 205
`
`Trading Technologies International, Inc.,
`
`Civil Action No. 05.-CV-481 1
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman
`
`V.
`
`Magistrate Judge Sidney I. Schenkier
`
`CQG, Inc. and CQGT, LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`VERDICT FORM
`
`INSTRUCTIONS: Answer the following questions 1 through 7, following the jury instructions
`and the instructions given on this Verdict Form.
`*
`.
`
`Infringement of the ‘132 Patent
`
`Do you find that Trading Technologies has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence,
`that CQG literally infringed any of the following claims of the U.S. Patent No. 6,772,132?
`
`Yes ~— Proven Infringed
`
`No -— Not Proven Infringed
`
`Claim l
`
`Claim 8
`
`34
`
`M
`
`Infringement of the ‘304 Patent
`
`Do you find that Trading Technologies has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence,
`that CQG literally has infringed any of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,766,304?
`
`Yes — Proven Infringed
`
`No — Not Proven Infringed
`
`Claim 1
`
`Claim 27
`
`‘g
`
`Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`Induced Infringement of the ‘132 Patent,
`
`Do you find that Trading Technologies has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence,
`that CQG has induced others to infringe any of the following claims of the U.S. Patent
`No. 6,772,132? ,
`
`Yes — Proven Inducement V No — Not Proven Inducement
`
`Claim 1
`
`I Claim 8
`
`T
`
`’
`
`1/
`
`1/
`
`Induced Infringement of the ‘304 Patent
`
`Do you find that Trading Technologies has proven, by a preponderance of the evidence,
`> that CQG has inducedothers to infringe any of the claims of Patent No. 6,766,304?
`
`Claim 1
`Claim 27
`
`Yes —AProven Inducement No —— Not Proven Inducement
`i
`
`' u/
`
`INSTRUCTIONS: You must answer the following questions only if you find that CQG has
`infringed or induced others to infringe one or more claims.
`If you found for CQG on
`infringement, do not answer the remaining questions. Instead, date and sign this form.
`
`Willful Infringement
`
`Do you find that Trading Technologies has proved, by clear and convincing evidence, that
`CQG’s infringement was objectively willful?
`
`Yes
`
`No
`
`M
`
`Do you find that Trading Technologies has proved, by clear and convincing evidence, that
`CQG’s infringement was subjectively willful?
`
`Yes
`
`No
`
`\/
`
`Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`Damages
`
`If you found that one or more claims of the ‘ 132 or ‘304 patents, or both, are infringed by
`CQG, what is the reasonable royalty damages that Trading Technologies should be
`awarded to compensate for the infringement by CQG?
`
`Q.
`
`5
`
`royalty rate per futures transaction
`( 2,
`royalty rate per non-derivative transaction
`'
`I ,Q¢
`(The parties agree that the rate for non-derivative transactions is 10 times the futures rate)
`
`2
`
`2’
`
`I
`
`royalty base
`(number of futures transactions)
`
`[
`
`I
`
`Q
`
`royalty base
`(number of non-derivative transactions)
`
`If you find that the royalty rate should include a minimum payment, please indicate that total
`amount below.
`
`$ HQFZ 2 Z fz
`
`I
`
`total minimum payment
`
`Calculate the total as follows:
`
`Futures royalty rate times futures base plus non-derivative royalty rate times non-derivative base
`plus total minimum payment if any.
`
`5 '38
`
`0
`
`TOTAL ROYALTY AWARD
`
`Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`INSTRUCTIONS: Please sign and date this form.
`
`Dated:
`
`O;
`
`‘
`
`'
`
`I
`
`~
`
`Fore erson:
`
`p
`
`f4}. Qhta
`
`-
`
`-
`
`V
`
`\ . 41/_
`
`-
`,
`1 M4
`"5
`Q ,
`____JL .’’3.‘'l.'.‘A __
`{"7} (
`‘-1-’ A
`
`V *0
`"‘
`.
`
`I
`
`,
`
`~.4
`/T‘
`K/“ix/¥~°~»\
`-. /
`
`_ W
`
`a /
`
`~
`
`! 11% 4fJ _. V
`f
`
`;::;';.;.‘_
`‘ q‘
`
`V
`
`I
`
`Page 5 of 5